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!

Internet Devices Get Their Own Ubuntu Version

samzenpus posted more than 6 years ago | from the your-own-personal-linux dept.

Linux Business 87

Barence writes "A version of Ubuntu targeted specifically towards mobile internet devices (MIDs) has been released by Canonical, although there is presently only one product on the market which can use it. According to the company, the pithily titled Mobile Internet Device Edition 8.04 has been optimized for use with handheld internet platforms, and designed to run smoothly on Intel's Atom chips as well as with small touchscreen displays. This follows Canonical's announcement earlier this month that it would be creating a version of Ubuntu for netbook devices such as the Asus Eee PC and the Acer Aspire One called Netbook Remix."

cancel ×

87 comments

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

No good OS has been released since late 2007 (-1, Troll)

russlar (1122455) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943289)

No good OS has been released since late 2007. Think about it.

Leopard=fail, Apple is already working on 10.6
Vista=worst OS since Windows Me. Enough said.
Ubuntu Hardy=does the phrase "my god, it's full of bugs" come to mind?


ahhh.....karma to burn.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1, Insightful)

adona1 (1078711) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943369)

In fairness......Leopard - an incremental upgrade. Apple tend to release them (comparatively) frequently.
Vista - worst OS since Windows ME? There has been one release between ME & Vista (not counting 64 bit versions). So...worst out of 2 OS'? Eh.
Hardy Heron - I've not personally come across many bugs, YMMV there I suppose.

No good operating systems in 8 or 9 months? Man, they should be releasing new versions weekly!

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1, Insightful)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943411)

First of all, Windows Server 08 is rock solid and fast. So you're already wrong. Hardy is a sloppy release but includes upgrades for LOTS of packages trying to get into LTS so that's to be expected. Leopard and Vista were both kind of crappy, but so were their predecessors. Vista's better than the playskool stressfest that was XP.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943939)

Brian Gordon is either a TOOL of Microsoft or has no EXPERIENCE with LINUX/UNIX.

First of all, Windows Server 08 is rock solid and fast. So you're already wrong. Hardy is a sloppy release but includes upgrades for LOTS of packages trying to get into LTS so that's to be expected. Leopard and Vista were both kind of crappy, but so were their predecessors. Vista's better than the playskool stressfest that was XP.

Good Luck on installing Software on that 2008 server from the Internet, CD, and LAN at the same time. Windows I/O has always sucked and still does with 2008 server. Linux handles it. SUN handles it. AIX handles it.

Brian Gorden payed Microsoft $899 for a 5 client OS that can't even handle extreme loads. He is bitching about a Free OS that does. He hasn't tried RedHat or SuSE servers but complains about desktop Ubuntu.

Brian Gorden is a dumbass who could care less about the servers he maintains as long as its "easy". He is not going to select the best technology based on merit. He is going to select the overpriced technology he is familiar with.

Yes, this post will be indexed by Google.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944759)

What you just did is disgusting. I hope someday someone does that to you, you little troll.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23945701)

Sure there's some googlebombing going on there but he also has some valid points sprinkled in too. You could have responded by refutation, but instead chose moral outrage.

Your post is actually below even troll standards and is merely a flame.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23949561)

You misspelled my name anyway :)

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945855)

Brian Gorden payed ...

Brian Gorden is ...

Can you spell 'fail'?

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23949349)

fail

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

outZider (165286) | more than 6 years ago | (#23949365)

Oh, no, no, no. Linux completely blows at I/O. The amount of iowait I deal with on anything less than pure SCSI disks is insane for any operating system, and it is handily beaten by FreeBSD, Solaris, and Windows.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Informative)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943955)

Vista's better than the playskool stressfest that was XP.

Absolute hogwash. I bought a vista notebook, which now has Hardy on it, and it was slow to do anything. Not only is IO slow, but the way they have laid things out in the UI is slow too. The number of clicks it takes to do any system configuration stuff is painful. Combine that with digital restriction management and the whole experience sucks.

If I was interested in running windows, I would prefer XP. Even better would be 2000, if they had bothered to maintain it and provide updates. Vista is an absolute joke which I found unusable and given that I was only ever exposed to ME for about half an hour, I think it's the worst OS since Windows 1.0. Vista is more of a playskool stressfest - it looks all plasticy and colourful, but it's made entirely of big, bloated clunky pieces that, while they may choke the hardware, won't choke the silly little kiddies that play with them and it is unusable for the task it looks like it should perform. It's so playskool.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Interesting)

Calinous (985536) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945577)

Windows 2000 still has one update or another from time to time. It's totally off the update map, but my Win2000 workstation still announce me of some update or another once a month or so (true, they are critical security updates and might only be for IE, Media Player, and other Microsoft applications, not to the operating system proper)

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Interesting)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23949663)

Oh I don't dispute that out of the box, vista is absolutely terrible. In order for it to be remotely usable after a reinstall, I have to:
-Disable the indexing service
-Disable all the other crap services I don't need like the diagnostic service
-Turn off slow Aero transparency and just use opaque Aero
-Run the registry tweaks to get sane folder type identification (make EVERYTHING "all items" by default)
-Disable all MRU features and make my start menu all pins
-Disable IE and WMP.
-Disable sidebar.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

MaXMC (138127) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951179)

Do you have a link to those registry tweaks?

I'm sick and tired of all folders wanting to sort after "Date Taken" instead of "Date Modified"

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23973299)

Try this [windows-now.com]

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 6 years ago | (#23959455)

You forgot to one:
-Install it inside VirtualBox on Linux. It's much easier to manage that way and the performance is about the same on VBox 1.6.x as native, at least subjectively on my hardware.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944125)

Windows Server 08 is rock solid and fast.

That's not been my experience, bloated and slow come to mind.

About 5GB for the install of the base OS alone. With the increase in popularity of the VM, where hardrive space is limited (particularly for Web servers) Windows Server 2008 will never fly. Pay for the license and the extra resources, just for .NET? No thanks, I'd rather use Mono on Debian.

That's without even starting on the CPU and RAM resources, it looks all impressive when you first start it (using less than 500MB of RAM IIRC), but as soon as you start some services the Vista-esque RAM gobbling kicks in. Come to think of it: Windows Server 2008 won't even install on less the 512MB of RAM, compared to Linux, that sucks (see VM point above).

Did a quick compare with my Debian server, which usually has a load of around 10 concurrent connections. Serving pages from Drupal, with a PHP Opcode cache and MySQL caching. Debian uses ~500MB of RAM, Windows Server 2008 loaded with a similar feature set (under zero load) used 1.5GB and constantly churned the CPU.

It might as well be named VistaServe Shite Edition '08 in my opinion. Posted as AC as this is totally off-topic, but I just had to debunk the shilling done by the OP.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23949701)

I don't know about how it performs as a server, but without any server roles and configured as a workstation it's an excellent environment.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

twistedcubic (577194) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944839)

Not sure if Windows 2008 is rock solid, but I like it because ... it's a free download, so I run it as a KVM virtual machine. Add to that Visual C++ Express Edition, and I don't have to purchase any MS software when I need it for teaching. Pretty cool.

Nice homepage, by the way!

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946075)

Hardy is a sloppy release but includes upgrades for LOTS of packages trying to get into LTS so that's to be expected

This is the exact reason that I ran from Ubuntu this release after four years of trying to work with them and promoting them. Did no one get the memo that an LTS version should have been more stable. That it was sloppy was not "to be expected" -- it was a disaster.

Once Shuttleworth came out crowing about how great the six-month release cycle was and how everyone should be on it, I threw up in my lap then quickly reformatted everything in my house/cubicle back to Debian the way it was in 2004.

Yeah, Etch is ancient in Desktop Linux terms, but Lenny won't come out until they feel it's ready. I can count on something stable working for several years after that.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946969)

It's pretty clear that there would be some bugs. (Personally I haven't seen any bug to date in my Ubuntu 8.04 system - but I use it right now only sparsely.)

On other side it is important for LTS release to get software as fresh as possible - because users are going to use it for quite some time.

It is some fancy mix of Debian support concept and Ubuntu's strive to do often releases. I think what does Ubuntu for such LTS releases is pretty good idea.

If you really want super stable desktop, I can recommend to buy workstation version of SuSE - SLED - with support. It costs not that much after all and software on average works well, since SuSE does invest some resources into actual testing before releasing something.

/me runs hiding from Novel/SuSE haters due to their partnership with M$.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 6 years ago | (#23947661)

LTS means "Will be supported for a long time", that is, be receiving bug fixes and other updates for a while. It does not mean "First version works perfectly". Yes, people will be using Hardy for a long time, but they will not be using the version as released in April 2008, they'll be using the most recent version.

It works the opposite way to what you're suggesting: obviously, all bugs need to be avoided. But bugs in 7.10 are of considerably more concern because there's only a relatively short timescale in which fixes will come down the pipe. If you're using 7.10 next year, it's safe to say you're going to have to live with any bugs in the distribution.

This is not the same as 8.04 LTS. Not only are Canonical going to do what they can to squeeze the important bugs out of the system in the next few months, but will continue to do so for all of the other problems over the next three years.

My advice with any version of Ubuntu is never upgrade when it comes out anyway, unless you have a drop-dead issue you really must upgrade for. I'm running 7.10 on my work PC and home shared PC. I'll upgrade both once I'm comfortable 8.04 LTS is more stable than the generally excellent 7.10. There have been several times in the last month where I've considered doing that, and held of largely because I want to be doubly sure rather than because of any specific bug I'm running into.

For what it's worth, I'd put 8.04 right now as more stable than 7.04 was when I upgraded to 8.04 (May, I think.) Your mileage may vary depending upon your hardware factors and other similar stuff.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 6 years ago | (#23959169)

No. No. And no. Canonical stated at the beginning of the Hardy cycle that this release needed to be more stable and bug-free than any other release to date. Instead, they shipped an OS which had default apps (F-Spot for one) which didn't even launch on the 64-bit version. Utter crap.

Ubuntu is now an "I'll wait for the first service pack" OS.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

maglor_83 (856254) | more than 6 years ago | (#23961997)

For what it's worth, I'd put 8.04 right now as more stable than 7.04 was

7.06

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Informative)

bananaquackmoo (1204116) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943433)

one release? which is that? 2000? XP? server 2003? try again...

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

adona1 (1078711) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943493)

I was referring to consumer OS releases only, and to XP specifically. I pulled the release dates from here [wikipedia.org] , so if I'm wrong, I blame the source :)

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

frup (998325) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943591)

8.04 is an odd release.

On 3 computers I have tried it on it runs relatively fine, including one which is getting rather old.

OTOH on a Dell, that is almost completely Intel based, and so should have completely open kernel modules, it is constantly crashing. 1 in 5 boots I have to sudo /etc/init.d/networking restart just to get the internet to work. Firefox is constantly crashing, as is X. The weirdest thing is there seems to be a problem that is either X based or Gnome based that results in applications like pidgin, gedit, the gnome-games from just blanking out when started. Restarting services doesn't really help and only a complete reboot actually works (so far).

So while 8.04 works absolutely perfectly on 3 computers, on the other it is a hunk of shit. On the oldest machine it works better than any distribution since Mandrake 10.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943817)

Time to test your RAM.

Hardware (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943977)

You got some hardware probs on that Dell it sounds more like.

Re:Hardware (1)

Directrix1 (157787) | more than 6 years ago | (#23950997)

No its just the Intel Wireless open source drivers suck ass, and Network Manager can't work them.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (4, Insightful)

indi0144 (1264518) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945751)

I agree with you and I have seen this kind of input all around: Ubuntu 8.04 it's great on old hardware, specially laptops.. so, getting on topic, An Ubuntu release for PID's/NETBooks should be a killer. Anyone know If this release works on old laptops or it's just intended for NEW specific machines?

Maybe that it's what I like about Ubuntu, it's Linux, it's mostly FOSS but they manage to do it in a commercial and asertive way, I mean, they release specific version that works on a variety of platforms, it's easy on Joe Beigebox and teaches to develop the community way of thinking, so you know somewhere on the intertubes theres an answer or some dude ready to help, also it teaches you that computing it's way more than start button and Ctrl+Z.

Don't bash Ubuntu for being so user friendly or the "bloat" in the GUI.. think that most of the people starting on Ubuntu will move forward to another distros as they advance in their knowledge, someday I will make the step to Slackware I love it, but I just don't feel ready, but hey! I'm loving learning this stuff as many people out there. No one of them are 1337s, maybe some will become.. lend a hand to the little brothers, you just don't know what ta13nts are coming in the way.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (3, Interesting)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946387)

What i want to see, is an OS which is compiled specifically for the Atom CPUs...
As i understand it, these processors are in-order processors, and therefore rely on the compiler to schedule execution correctly for their internal resources, as opposed to a full blown core2 which will reorder the instruction stream on the fly and thus compensate for less optimal compilers.

Doing this should yield quite significant performance improvements on the Atom processors...

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (3, Informative)

gibbsjoh (186795) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946147)

Not tried it on new hardware, but I was really impressed last night when I put it on a 3 year old Toshiba Sat Pro - it just worked(tm). Even let me disable trackpad clicking without faffing about. Played AVI and MP4/H.264 with minimal fuss. Wifi will be the next step.

I love tinkering but sometimes just want a distro to work - 8.04, whatever bugs aside, seems to fit the bill, to the point where I can finally recommend it to friends and co-workers.

My 0.02.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (3, Insightful)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943747)

I still hold that I like Windows ME, at least a user had a lot of control over what it did and did not do.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

alexgieg (948359) | more than 6 years ago | (#23947781)

I'd have liked ME if MS hadn't disabled real mode driver support for no better reason than "just because". I had lots of hardware at the time that required stuff to be loaded from CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT, and none worked in ME, not to mention having to boot from a floppy to play DOS games.

Other than this, it seemed to be a 98SE with better icons, and I'd have enjoyed using it if it had been at all possible.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Mr._Galt (608248) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951207)

you forgot the /sarcasm tag....ME was the worst till Vista

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23957579)

I wasn't being sarcastic

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943923)

No good OS release? What are you talking about? Emacs 22.2 came out in March!

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Insightful)

this great guy (922511) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945399)

If only Emacs came with a decent text editor...

Viper Is a Package for Emacs Rebels (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946845)

If only Emacs came with a decent text editor...
You mean like Viper mode [delorie.com] ?

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Random Walk (252043) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946323)

Hardy Heron - I've not personally come across many bugs, YMMV there I suppose.

Ok, let me point out a few I've experienced. Some of these are outright inexcusable, I think. I've filed bugs for some of them, or found them already in the bug database; none of them seem to be handled very well. My overall impression is that Ubuntu is grossly understaffed for solid quality control.

  • On my laptop, the DVD drive is not recognized at all after boot (it was recognized when installing from CD, though...must be an awfully stupid bug)
  • Sound not working properly (stutters). Maybe related to the fact that pulseaudio was rushed into the release...
  • With automounted homedir, 'tracker' causes any 'Save as' dialog to hang for minutes
  • Likewise, with 'fast-user-switch-applet' installed, GNOME login may hang
  • Wifi only initialized at boot - switch off/on, and it doesn't work anymore, not initialized
  • NetworkManager unusable - can't configure static address at one place (home) and DHCP at another place (work)
  • Firefox 3 looses all bookmarks when the box crashes hard. None of the recovery methods proposed at the Mozilla website works, needed to recover from backup. The funny thing is that Mozilla suggests to upgrade from FF2 to FF3 to fix such problems, while FF2 worked perfectly fine with the profile in question, while FF3 could not read the bookmarks anymore...

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23946647)

Sound not working properly (stutters). Maybe related to the fact that pulseaudio was rushed into the release...

Pulseaudio sucks bigtime. Got a new PC and as a result had to upgrade from Fedora 7 to Fedora 8 to support the hardware, and this bought in Pulseaudio and the 'stutter'. I tried various how-to instructions to first get it working, then remove it but couldn't get it sorted and ended up switching to Ubuntu Gutsy, which worked perfectly (no pulseaudio). But the next release of Ubuntu (Hardy) has pulseaudio, so I'm going to wait until next year and hope it's useable by then...
It's one thing Fedora using pulseaudio; it's supposed to be bleeding edge. But I think it was a big mistake putting it into Ubuntu well before it was ready.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

goltzc (1284524) | more than 6 years ago | (#23950563)

I'm going to disagree with you here. Pulse Audio was a big improvement for me. Jack sensing started working on my laptop and overall consistency of performance across applications improved.

But I suppose inconsistency in user experience is going to happen until hardware manufacturers start opening up their code.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951405)

Most of these complaints are probably bugs in the underlying open source software they used. They can't fix Firefox 3 overnight or rewrite gnome. Maybe they can come up with some fixes and patches, but I think you're expecting too much from them. They don't write the whole thing like Microsoft. They don't charge like Apple or Microsoft. If you hate the quality control, help them. Offer your time. Also, file bug reports with Mozilla and Gnome. The DVD drive thing could be a different kernel on the install cd versus the install or some other weird thing.

People underestimate how hard it is to pull an OS release together. Ubuntu is big enough to get some testers, but still it's difficult to put all that open source stuff together and keep up on security as well as stability.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951859)

... you're not really in a situation to complain about ubuntu, being free an' all.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943373)

These things come in waves. Give it time. Snow Leopard may prove to be a great improvement, updates to Hardy will fix the initial problems.

I'm afraid we're just going to have to wait until Windows 7 for a better Microsoft OS

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Insightful)

Xygon (578778) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943469)

ZOMG, they're working on their next version, this one must have sucked! "Leopard=fail, Apple is already working on 10.6" Since when is working on the next version of your OS a sign of failure, and not a sign of good business sense and continual development?

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (0, Redundant)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946165)

ZOMG, they're working on their next version, this one must have sucked! "Leopard=fail, Apple is already working on 10.6" Since when is working on the next version of your OS a sign of failure, and not a sign of good business sense and continual development?

GP is the ultimate Apple fanboi.
Leopard is less than perfect, and the ultimate Apple fanboi expects nothing less than perfection from Apple. Therefore, Leopard == fail.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951465)

When apple can't fix it and they have to move on completely. Authenticating with LDAP is a nightmare on 10.5. I've been trying to upgrade a lab to leopard, and it's very painful. I wouldn't even consider migrating servers yet. Most of the NeXT guys retired. This was their first big release out of that and it shows. I know how they feel because I've had problems with releases too. The difference is that I don't charge for my work.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943507)

If you're going to run the latest OS then of course you're going to get problems. That's what service packs/updates are for. They're working on Ubuntu 8.04.1, if you're so concerned about the bugs on Ubuntu you could have stayed with Gutsy for a bit. Vista's bad but it could be a whole lot worse.

Besides, there are loads of other operating systems out there, along with different distros of Linux. If three releases have been less than satisfactory does that mean all seventy bajillion different releases in the year have been equally disappointing?

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23943511)

yes because there are only 3 operating systems in existence. There is obviously only one linux distro, and all the other ones on distrowatch are fakes

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944247)

What bugs? I've never had a problem -- and that was since Ubuntu Alpha 5.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (4, Insightful)

queldor (1184789) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944669)

What about Freebsd 7.0, they did a wonderful job of that.

Re:No good OS has been released since late 2007 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23946459)

Although certainly nothing amazing, I have found Ubuntu Hardy to be far better than Gutsy. Gutsy made my wireless, sound, hibernate & sleep all fail, they worked in Feisty. I was about to reinstall Feisty when I tried Hardy and everything worked again!

this is great (2, Interesting)

Brain Damaged Bogan (1006835) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943453)

Canonical are one of the big movers and shakers in the OSS world, and that they are putting so much effort into putting OSS on as many devices is possible is good to see. Of course it could be a futile effort IF Nokia buy out Symbian and open up it's source.

Re:this is great (3, Interesting)

Xygon (578778) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943509)

Symbian's OS might be great once open sourced, but the breadth and depth of applications built for Linux, as well as the design of Symbian OS for handhelds, not MIDs, says to me that it's a long ways from being better for this type of platform. Symbian can grow from small to larger, but I myself would rather have a full featured OS on my MID than a phone system turned OS.

Re:this is great (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944143)

I could certainly be wrong; but I'm strongly inclined to doubt the viability of Symbian on the MID. Symbian is, to be sure, superior to Linux in terms of small footprint and low resource demands. However, Linux is far more general in terms of design and body of available software.

Looking at the history of Palm OS, I am inclined to believe that expanding a specialized OS is harder than slimming a general one. Back in the day, Palm OS was hilariously superior as a handheld system. It ran practically forever on pitiful hardware and a couple of AAA's, and the system of "conduits" was a fairly elegant structure by which a handheld could function as an extension to a desktop computer. Over time, though, Palm OS didn't grow very well. Features like a network stack(sync over network was a nice feature; but just wasn't the same thing as actual network access, which never really meshed with the Palm OS structure) and interaction with mass storage devices with user visible filesystems just didn't fit with the old structure of tying data directly to applications.

Even now, with the benefit of significant advances in silicon and battery technology, it would be hard to get a linux system to match the old Palm OS devices in their areas of strength; but the fact that Linux has by nature features that Palm OS could never really integrate properly has proven to be more important. In the case of Symbian, I would also note that Nokia's own N770, N800, and N810 "Internet Tablets" are Linux, rather than Symbian, devices.

Since the purpose of a MID is to bring a limited number of the functions of a full computer to a handheld device in as close to their full form as possible(e.g. webbrowsing, not general purpose apps; but full webbrowsing, not cut down mobile phone crap), Linux is a pretty natural candidate; being, as it is, modular enough to shrink down while offering pretty much any computer function ready for the taking.

Microsoft's error (2, Insightful)

DrYak (748999) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946731)

However, Linux is far more general in terms of design and body of available software. {...} Linux is a pretty natural candidate; being, as it is, modular enough to shrink down while offering pretty much any computer function ready for the taking.
And this is where Microsoft somewhat missed the point with their offering.
On one hand they have a windows vista which is a large resource hog and just can't be crammed inside a small device.
On the other hand they have WinCE/Pocket PC which, well has *windows* in the name, and has some related elements in its API, but well, is just an entirely different beast which : both doesn't give the advantage that a derivative of an OS has in terms of features and is a descendant of a handheld system which limits its possibility of evolution.

Linux' best advantage is its hackability and its scalability.
Yes, granted, as regularly mentioned on /. trolls, Joe Six-pack and grand ma Tillie don't need to recompile their kernel each other day, just to get WiFi working.
On the other hand, industry will like the possibility to take linux and hack it to fit some very specific and unusual needs, that conventional OS couldn't fit. And the best part : at the end it's still Linux and still related to the full blown system running on the desktop.

Cannonical with this kind of Ubuntu flavors is doing exactly what is best to enable more of such things to happen.

Re:this is great (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946971)

I am inclined to believe that expanding a specialized OS is harder than slimming a general one.

See also: DOS + Windows 3.1 -> Vista.

Re:this is great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944591)

Canonical is very good at marketing Linux, but "mover and shaker"? PLEASE. Linux on the desktop will never be profitable enough for them to survive.
Mark will get tired of it and give up eventually, then no more marketing, and it'll all dry up like it never happened.

Anyone ever hear about a software company called Loki? Yah... I didn't think so.
Linux is fueled mostly by massive numbers of idealistic college & high school students with an insanely high turnover rate once they get real jobs at businesses running more than ten servers, or have a family and decide using computers to do work is more important than playing with them for the sake of it. If you can't squeeze money out of this market with video games, W.T.F. CAN?

Unfortunately, some in the later group are fucking nuts and are responsible for all the UNIX to Linux migrations going around. These are the people who would do more work for the same pay, to save the company some money where they really _should_ have invested it.

Linux (the kernel/OS/etc) is fine, it's really all the baggage, ideologies, cheapskates, etc. that comes with it that hurts it in the long run.

Kitchen appliances? (3, Funny)

allanw (842185) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943813)

How about Ubuntu: Toaster edition?

Re:Kitchen appliances? (3, Informative)

gawdonblue (996454) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943979)

How about Ubuntu: Toaster edition
The Cylons Were Created by Ubuntu. They Rebelled. They Evolved. They Look and Feel Human. Some are programmed to think they are Human. There are many copies. And they have a Plan...

Re:Kitchen appliances? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944227)

Nice one.

You should make it your sig.

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

gawdonblue (996454) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945831)

Thanks, and good idea about the sig!

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

gawdonblue (996454) | more than 6 years ago | (#23963401)

Informative? God, I've been modded up by Microsoft!

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

BRSloth (578824) | more than 6 years ago | (#23943981)

Runs NetBSD! And Java!

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944393)

How about Ubuntu: Toaster edition?
Just don't forget to RTFM [xkcd.com]

Re:Kitchen appliances? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944529)

Already been done [youtube.com] .

Re:Kitchen appliances? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944747)

Please, even a version of Ubuntu for toasters is going to be much too bloated for any standard toaster today.

(Though, if they could pull it off, that'd be the most user friendly swiss army knife of a toaster known to man)

Re:Kitchen appliances? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944783)

i hear they're working on a ubuntu: dildo edition. for all the fags who already like having dicks up their faggot asses. fucking faggots.

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946183)

i hear they're working on a ubuntu: dildo edition. for all the fags who already like having dicks up their faggot asses. fucking faggots.

Ah.

So, they are taking on OS X as well?

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

ddcc (946751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945025)

I'd prefer Ubuntu Java: Coffee Pot Edition with RFC 2324 goodness. Though no NetBeans, please.

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

TENTH SHOW JAM (599239) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945573)

Funny as it seems, I'm currently having a play with Ubuntu: Fire alarm edition, so you should be ok if Toaster Edition crashes and burns...

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

Synthaxx (1138473) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946785)

I tried that once, but the "installation" process smelled awful.

Re:Kitchen appliances? (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 6 years ago | (#23948095)

No, running your OS on a toaster only works if the OS is the brain spawn of an angry South African.

Good news everyone! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23948783)

I've taught the toaster to love!

Captcha: instruct

this is a great day (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23944425)

it's a great day if you're a linux fag that is. fucking dicksmoking assfucking faggots. go and fuck yourselves out of computers, we're fucking fed up with you dumb faggots already.

Re:this is a great day (1)

ruben.gutierrez (913239) | more than 6 years ago | (#23945155)

Anonymous Coward? Everybody knows it's you Col. Fitts.

Re:this is a great day (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23945179)

what are you? a fag sympathiser? you love the fags? why would you defend the assfags loving big dicks in their ass? the dick smokers who are dirty and get the aids and die? fucking moron, reject their faggot lies.

Re:this is a great day (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23946371)

And yet you frequent a site famous for it's pro-linux views. Is it that you love hanging around with "fags", hmm?

I would be curious... (2, Interesting)

toppavak (943659) | more than 6 years ago | (#23944893)

to hear from someone with a bit more understanding of the reason the builds posted for MID are specific to Menlow and McCaslin and whether / why these builds would or wouldn't work on more generic intel hardware such as present in the current eeePCs not to mention how difficult would it be to get it to run properly (just install the generic i386 kernel?).

Re:I would be curious... (2, Informative)

gwniobombux (941420) | more than 6 years ago | (#23946003)

From Ubuntu Mobile and Embedded FAQ: [ubuntu.com]

# What's the difference between UME packages and regular i386 packages?
  • For the kernel there are a few changes to support the LPIA architecture better (TODO: check with Amit). For the user applications, they have a special rule to enable or disable resources when compiled for LPIA. We may use the hildon interface and/or disable something that we don't have/don't need. We want to improve usability for small screens and fingers.

The Real Reason (1)

Stickerboy (61554) | more than 6 years ago | (#23951479)

The devs just wanted half-naked women calendars [wikipedia.org] on as many mobile devices as possible.

It's not ready (1)

Clovert Agent (87154) | more than 6 years ago | (#23954297)

I have a strong suspicion this is going to get flamebaited, but seriously, although I use Ubuntu every day, and have enormous respect for Mark Shuttleworth (he appeared on our podcast: http://zatechshow.co.za/episode-14 [zatechshow.co.za] ), I don't think Ubuntu is ready for mobile environments.

You can blame the lack of hardware support and other vendors if you like, but the fact remains that the user experience for Linux laptops is pretty damned iffy. Power management isn't, hibernate and suspend sometimes works, sometimes doesn't and sometimes breaks other pieces of the OS seemingly at random, WiFi support is hit and miss...the list just goes on.

Linux on servers is almost a given now. Linux on desktops is, arguably, a better default option than Windows - I've found gaming under Wine to work faster and better than under Windows natively. But Linux in general on laptops and ultraportables? My experience says no. Not with a generic distro. It can work for locked down platforms like the Asus EEE and Acer Aspire One because the hardware is, like a Mac, predefined and the distro is built to fit, but not for broader use. If you happen get lucky and all your mobile hardware works, then terrific - you're in the same position as a desktop user was ten years ago. But that's not me: Linux on my laptops is very hard work (so a fun hobby), but not something I feel I can trust for any real work.

Which is not to say I don't respect how incredibly far Linux has evolved on laptops. It's come a long way and the community will surely iron out the remaining bugs in due course. But realistically, it's not there yet. I'm impressed that there's a dedicated Ubuntu package for ultraportables and I wouldn't for a moment suggest that team is wasting its time, but I could not in all conscience recommend it to anyone until I've seen some major progress on those big mobile-related issues.

Re:It's not ready (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23956273)

What about an extremely lightweight version, with support for common low power CPU's and associated hardware, which hardware developers can use to design their system around. Think windows CE... it's not a complete failure.

At this day in age, many hardware manufacturers are actually designing their systems around the software's capabilities and support rather than the other way around.

For example, ACME might want to make the "internet connected toster with touchscreen darkness controls and mp3 playback"... instead of going out and designing the hardware without thought to the OS it would run would be foolish... who want's to write an OS from scratch?

Mobile Internet Device Operating System (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 6 years ago | (#23954867)

Mobile Internet Device Edition 8.04
May I humbly suggest: MIDOS?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>