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 Answers Your Questions

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the listen-up dept.

Ubuntu 236

A couple of weeks ago you had a chance to ask Canonical Ltd. and the Ubuntu Foundation founder, Mark Shuttleworth, anything about software and vacationing in space. Below you'll find his answers to your questions. Make sure to look for our live discussion tomorrow with free software advocate and CTO of Rhombus Tech, Luke Leighton. The interview will start at 1:30 EST.The Next Frontier?
by eldavojohn

We've seen Linux go from servers to supercomputers to smartphones in a very explosive manner but not as pervasively on the personal computer. What, in your opinion, is the next frontier for Linux and is that frontier part of Canonical's future?

Shuttleworth: The really interesting opportunity is to unify all of these different kinds of computing. Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer. We're close to that now - we know Ubuntu makes a great cloud OS and a great server OS and a great desktop. So I think the next frontier is to create a seamless experience from the embedded world to the cloud. And yes, that's very much what we are focused on at Canonical.



How to succeed on the desktop?
by paulpach

Linux is a huge success in mobile. Linux is a huge success in servers (and Ubuntu in particular seems to be doing very well in servers, congratulations). But Linux on the desktop seems to be going nowhere fast as far as market share is concerned. In your opinion, what would have to happen in order for Linux to start gaining ground in the desktop?

Shuttleworth: The mobile world is crucial to the future of the PC. This month, for example, it became clear that the traditional PC is shrinking in favor of tablets. So if we want to be relevant on the PC, we have to figure out how to be relevant in the mobile world first.

Mobile is also interesting because there's no pirated Windows market. So if you win a device to your OS, it stays on your OS. In the PC world, we are constantly competing with "free Windows", which presents somewhat unique challenges.

So our focus now is to establish a great story around Ubuntu and mobile form factors - the tablet and the phone - on which we can build deeper relationships with everyday consumers. All the major PC companies now ship PC's with Ubuntu pre-installed. So we have a very solid set of working engagements in the industry. But those PC companies are nervous to promote something new to PC buyers. If we can get PC buyers familiar with Ubuntu as a phone and tablet experience, then they may be more willing buy it on the PC too.



Tablets
by thePsychologist

Hi Mark! It seems based on your blog and other sources that an Ubuntu tablet is definitely planned and should be in the works at least sometime in the next year. When do you think consumers will be able to walk into any decently-sized electronic store and pick up an Ubuntu-based tablet?

Shuttleworth: No pre-announcements here, sorry!

But yes, we've said clearly that the phone and tablet are key stories we need to tell by 14.04 LTS. So I hope that by then you'll know when and where to expect it in-store :)



Oracle certification
by hawkinspeter

Will Ubuntu ever be a certified platform for running Oracle databases?

Shuttleworth: That's not really something I can say "yes" to ;)

We do know that there are some very large Oracle databases running on Ubuntu, and the people running them get all the support they need from Oracle. If you're a large Oracle shop, call them up and ask for support on Ubuntu. But of course, with Oracle's own Linux now in the market, Oracle is unlikely to promote another Linux until they change strategy.

Nowadays, we get asked about this very rarely - people seem to have moved to care a lot more about Hadoop and some of the newer big-data options than they do about traditional SQL. And of course Ubuntu is by far the most popular OS for large big-data deployments. Perhaps for that reason we are not pushing Oracle very hard ourselves - we've met a few times and their reaction has been some corporate equivalent of .



Re:A couple of questions
by cheesybagel

Why doesn't Ubuntu include Android emulation so people can run their vast catalog of Android apps on their laptop, tablet or the like?

Shuttleworth: Because no OS ever succeeded by emulating another OS. Android is great, but if we want to succeed we need to bring something new and better to market.

If we said we aimed to run Android apps, then two things would happen. Every developer that potentially cared about Ubuntu would feel it was OK to just write an app for Android. And every bug that would be specific to our implementation of Android's APIs would of course be a bug for us to fix, not a bug for the app developer. So, we won't do that.



Touch-a-touch-a-touch me...
by Count Fenring

Unity, like most other operating system visual shells, is moving in a decidedly touch-oriented direction. Has this actually proved beneficial in pushing forward an OS that's primarily in use on servers and workstations? Have users (as a percentage of total OS users, or as a percentage of total Linux users) risen or declined since Unity was introduced?

Shuttleworth: Unity positions itself to be *ready* for touch-only platforms like the tablet and phone, but the desktop flavour of Unity is optimized for the desktop. That's why we have such great support for keyboard navigation and hotkeys, why we have menus and indicators that you really need a mouse and keyboard to use. Yes, we have big app icons. But so have some desktop shells for 15 years (before the NextStep Dock, even).

On balance, I think Ubuntu's share of users has continued to rise, based on trends in hard-to-fake sources like Wikipedia traffic logs. Unity is by far the most widely used shell on Ubuntu, despite the depressed-hipster "can't live with unity" meme. And the fact that the other DE's that are shooting for the future are adding bits and pieces of the Unity design suggests that we're on a good track. I'm rather proud of introducing several ideas before they showed up in MacOS and Windows, and I think we have more in the pipeline like that.

Unity was TWO big changes. First, there was the set of changes themselves. That's always hard - there's no way to change huge chunks of the big open source desktop in one fell swoop and get it all perfect in less than six months. So 11.04 was hard, it got better steadily, and it's really fantastic now. And second, there was a cultural shift. Ubuntu shifted towards leadership rather than simply integration. We thought design was important, we talked to the folks responsible for all the current DEs at the time, and they didn't seem to understand what was going to be the reality of personal computing - a highly mobile oriented world. So we led, and I'm glad we did, even though it is hard to do that.

It was very frustrating for us to essentially feel blocked from contributing - design or code - in the existing free desktop communities. It was weird when it became more productive to collaborate with KDE than with the core GNOME maintainers. But we couldn't let petty politics stop us - we're the only company that really cares about the desktop, and even though it hurt to be pushed out of the nest of existing partner communities, sometimes you have to decide to fight for what you believe in. And we did.



Losing its Lustre
by Skunk

Do you feel that Ubuntu might be losing its way amongst the more technical users with some of the decisions that are being made? For example, forcing a beta-level UI onto users for 3 versions of Ubuntu from 11.04-12.04, integrating paid search results from Amazon etc. Linux Mint, which is rapidly growing in popularity, would seem to be a backlash against Unity and is a splintering of Ubuntu (in fact the vast majority of packages are identical to Ubuntu). Do you therefore feel that Ubuntu's popularity has reached its peak and is at risk of stagnating or declining?

Shuttleworth: We are all at risk of stagnating if we don't pursue the future, vigorously. But if you pursue the future, you have to accept that not everybody will agree with your vision.

The raw numbers suggest that Ubuntu continues to grow in terms of actual users. And our partnerships - Dell, HP, Lenovo on the hardware front, and gaming companies like EA, Valve joining up on the software front - make me feel like we continue to lead where it matters.

The Linux distro market has always been highly fragmented and ideological. Nothing new there.



Do you get tired of all the bickering?
by olau

It's evident Canonical and you personally as dude-in-charge have received a lot of flak over the past years, especially as you have started producing more software in-house rather than relying on upstream. Linux seems to attract a horde of vocal fans that aren't afraid to complain when things aren't going their direction. Does that get on your nerves or have you learned to live with it? Are you happy as dude-in-charge-of-product?

Shuttleworth: Yeah, I've been quite astonished at the level of vitriol and paranoia that pervades some of the opinion-fests that pass for discussion and debate in the FLOSS community. And quite disappointed that more folk don't appreciate that we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shift the world towards a much more open platform than ever before, but that nasty flaming of individuals who lead that effort, whether its me or anyone else, is totally counter-productive.

I made the commitment to Ubuntu because I had opinions about how free software should steer itself to being the standard way people to software, and I felt that it was pointless to have opinions and not be willing to stand by them with personal skin in the game. If you're not willing to do real work to achieve the outcome you believe in, then you're just another empty vessel with an opinion. And as the saying goes, opinions are like assholes - everybody's got one. What matters is the people who are willing to knuckle down and do real work to make a difference.

And Ubuntu has attracted a very large number of those - not just the folks who you'll find in the headlines, but an astonishing number of great people who just help out because they can and they care. If FLOSS does get over the hump of common acceptance, it will be because of those (often unsung) heroes, not because of the big mouths of ideologues.



Balance between software freedom and usability?
by Bradmont

Ubuntu has made decisions that have been less than popular with the Free-software only crowd. Personally, I benefit from these decisions, for example, via easy access to Nvidia and Broadcom drivers on my laptop, but I also see the importance of the other side of the argument. What is your short- and long-term perspective on including restricted drivers and non-free software in Ubuntu? Is your approach simply pragmatic, do you hope to bring long-term change in industry practices by making free software a viable and important desktop platform, or something else entirely? Thanks!

Shuttleworth: Well, I feel the same way about this as I do about McCarthyism. The people who rant about proprietary software are basically insecure about their own beliefs, and it's that fear that makes them so nastily critical.

If your way of seeing the world IS genuinely more productive, effective, efficient, insightful and usable, then you should be confident that you will win in the long term, and folk who dabble in a different way of working will come to realize that you're right eventually. If FLOSS really is a better way for Oracle to do their thing, then the more we get them doing with FLOSS, the more likely they are to promote the people who are successful around that approach.

So I think Linus has been very smart to have a broadly permissive attitude to proprietary drivers in Linux, for example. He can still give a company the finger for being uncollaborative, but note that he was not being ideological about licenses, he was focused on the quality of engagement - about getting stuff actually working. That strikes a good balance in the kernel, where we want the core to be pretty definitively copyleft, but its good to let hardware companies dabble in non-free drivers if that's what they think is best. If we're right about the benefits of FLOSS, they'll get there in due course. That's why I was so happy to have Canonical leading a lot of the work around ARM Linux - those guys were all investing a lot, inefficiently, and we thought that if they tried a better way, they would like it and grow around it, and now Linaro is a lovely success story.

If you think you'll convince people to see things your way by ranting and being a dick, well, then you have much more to learn than I can possibly be bothered to spend time teaching.



Cool hack
by vlm

Describe a hack that you personally participated in that you find cool. Not you paid someone to ... or I once saw someone else ... or you bought something cool that ... I mean traditional hack like "identify problem" "flash of insight in ur brain" "minutes to days of sweat using techie tools" "something cool now exists, lookit". I don't care about the subject as long as its vaguely slashdot style technical and you think its cool and the slashdot audience would think its cool. The coolest hack is not necessarily the biggest or most famous, either. Maybe you have a hobby where you personally programmed the worlds coolest Christmas light display on your house, or you handmade a truly elaborate model railroad fully articulated draw bridge, I donno, whatever floats your boat. TLDR just tell your hack story, and make it cool.

Shuttleworth: I love design - and especially in combining ideas in ways that make them both better. A recent project was figuring out how we want to fit our phone, tablet and desktop stories into one coherent whole. I quite like the solution we came up with. Tell me if you like it after 14.04 LTS ;)



Governmental Roles In Space?
by eldavojohn

Since you like to comment on both government interaction with businesses and seem to be interested in space travel, what is the appropriate level of the government's role in space? Can you define what is too little and what is too far? What, if anything, should each nation regulate? Are nationalistic programs and races good for space travel or should it just all be privatized and given a sort of 'international waters' anything goes freedom?

Shuttleworth: The national space missions should be exploratory and seeking to push back boundaries, not crowding out the basics. I think the agencies failed to recognize that they could facilitate private sector activity in areas they pioneered, so we got stuck in agency-monopolized access to low earth orbit for decades. That is changing now, and the real win will be that agencies get lower-cost lift and certification and training options that let them plan the really pioneering missions of tomorrow - Mars and the outer planets.

Regulation is good for established markets - I generally like to see governments regulate hard to achieve efficiency and level playing fields in markets. What gets broken is government actors that participate directly, as Fannie and Freddie do in real estate in the US, for example. But I'm not a libertarian (apart from a brief spell in student days) - I've seen far to much corrupt and nasty behavior by corporates that act in a very narrow set of interests.

So, when you take that trip to low-earth orbit, or parabolic firecracker ride courtesy of one of the space tourism operators, you'll be glad of a regulatory framework that aims for passenger safety. And the professional astronauts, who don't really give a hoot about personal safety beyond the obvious "don't be an idiot with my life", will be glad for the access to deep space that they would get courtesy of a vibrant market in the "easy" stuff.

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

Dear Ubuntu (-1, Flamebait)

masternerdguy (2468142) | about 2 years ago | (#42243327)

Why are you trying to kill Linux?

Re:Dear Ubuntu (2, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | about 2 years ago | (#42243437)

To make it popular of course!

Kidding aside, this depresses me. In order for Linux to become more mainstream, a lot of the stuff that really drew my to linux and the open source community in the first place has to die.

I kinda wish Linux would have stayed as a niche toy for geeks..

Re:Dear Ubuntu (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243723)

WHAT? I can tell you how to live this perverse fantasy. Just:

a) Do not buy commercial software for Linux (e.g., the new Steam-for-Linux, and Humble Bundles)
b) Run a 1+ year old Linux kernel (try before the hardware you are trying to run was ever sold). Almost guaranteed bad support.
c) Use TWM as your window manager. It's still there. Some people actually like it. You can find another window manager if you happen to be one of those people.
d) Use Gentoo. I think some people managed to (eventually) compile a fully working system. Don't worry: your success will be in no way hurried by theirs, since you'll have to compile everything yourself anyway.

The rest of us are happy that things are easier, but that doesn't mean it has to be that way for you!

Re:Dear Ubuntu (2)

Anrego (830717) | about 2 years ago | (#42244213)

a) Do not buy commercial software for Linux (e.g., the new Steam-for-Linux, and Humble Bundles)

I've actually never had a problem with commercial software. I prefer to use open source, but if there is nothing practical I don't mind forking out some money for something that works.

d) Use Gentoo. I think some people managed to (eventually) compile a fully working system. Don't worry: your success will be in no way hurried by theirs, since you'll have to compile everything yourself anyway.

Already done ;p

It's actually interesting because in the last few years gentoo has gotten a lot more user friendly. Usable default profiles, genkernel not sucking, the fading memory of stage 1 installs, and most upstream packages switching to more generic feature-level use flags. Installing a gentoo system is now surprisingly simple.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243859)

I rather Linux change from "a niche toy for geeks" into a battle-hardened tool of efficiency yet openness. There is no reason why Linux can't be easy for 95% of people and still be open.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (2)

alexandre (53) | about 2 years ago | (#42244217)

Niche toy?
I suggest you go play with NetBSD, you insensitive druid! ;-)

Re:Dear Ubuntu (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243629)

Don't worry, there will still be plenty of other more obscure distributions for people like you to retreat to. After all, it's basically what anybody who considered Ubuntu or any other Linux distro did in the first place: retreat from Windows and Mac. Eventually everybody finds something they're comfortable with, and eventually it will change in a way that makes them get up and look for something "new" that is exactly like what they're used to.

The only thing Ubuntu is trying to kill is the perception that Linux should cater first to the computer nerds like you and me, but that's not a commercially viable strategy when - let's face it - we're clearly the minority of all users in general. Accept that you're not Ubuntu's target audience and move on if you can't adapt.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (4, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#42243809)

The dumb thing about Ubuntu though, is that they actually made me prefer Windows 7 because of simple little details like being able to move the system menu around where I want it. Strangely enough I've tried having my taskbar all over the place over the years. I have it at the top or the right in my VMs, bottom on the host OS for example. The left hand side is the only one that I really dislike - probably because I swing all the way over to the left to select text, as I have done for something like 25 years (whoah.. have I been using computers for that long? I guess so..).

The fact that Unity wouldn't let me move their dock, or change the hotkeys to ones that I'd been using for years, is what put me off. I liked everything else Ubuntu had changed up until that point.

This isn't me being a "depressed hipster". This is me expecting some very basic configuration options that both Windows and Linux have had for decades. Unity had nothing on docks like Avant or Docky. And in fact I'm now perfectly happy with Mint's default settings without even installing a dock..

Re:Dear Ubuntu (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#42243989)

After all, it's basically what anybody who considered Ubuntu or any other Linux distro did in the first place: retreat from Windows and Mac.

Incorrect. I wanted to use Unix, but it was too expensive. I never "retreated" from Windows and Mac. I ran DR DOS, then MS DOS, even on the Win95 system I just put a REM in AUTOEXEC.BAT on the line that ran WIN.EXE and remained on the command console (I used DOS not Windows, that's what all my programs and games ran on -- Some of MY programs still run on DR DOS). Thankfully, by the time MS decided to boot straight into GUI mode Linux was available for me to use -- I never retreated from Windows. I sidestepped it completely to avoid the brain damage that's caused when you make command terminals second rate citizens to GUI so users can't fix errors. Mac was never an option.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244289)

even on the Win95 system I just put a REM in AUTOEXEC.BAT on the line that ran WIN.EXE

Actually in Win 9x the GUI started regardless of win.exe being present or not in autoexec.bat. You had to edit msdos.sys and change BOOTGUI=1 to 0 (might also do LOGO=0). Before Windows 9x though, Windows was dependent on win.exe being executed explicitly. But then I never remarked it out, I just deleted the line altogether.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#42244567)

I think you're confusing a fancy boot splash for a GUI shell.

Wait, How Does One 'Kill' Linux? (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | about 2 years ago | (#42243647)

Why are you trying to kill Linux?

I'm confused, how exactly does one 'kill' Linux? I thought that one of the beautiful aspects of the GPL is its robustness. Everyone is free to do basically anything they want (with the most minor caveats) which is great because that means you can always just fork GPL'd code as long as you release your changes with your distributions. Even though I've moved from Debian to Xubuntu for my personal computers, I could very easily move back. This is not true with my servers (which have remained Debian for that very reason).

Personally I feel like Canonical has done a lot for Linux and they've done that by taking risks. Now Shuttleworth is taking risks that a lot of people simply do not agree with. It's fine to criticize these in detail but a hyperbole like "killing Linux" frankly befuddles me. How is this going to disrupt CentOS or Debian or Gentoo or Slackware or any other distro of Linux? Furthermore, how is this going to disrupt the core kernel itself? Linux is robust. Linux is alive and vibrant on servers. Canonical made a move to make it a desktop OS just like Android was an effort to put it on phones. If they think that taking their code is a smart gamble and you so strongly disagree with it, fork that code and start doing your own development.

Shuttleworth can't kill Linux. He can make stupid decisions that negatively affect Ubuntu but at the end of the day, he's getting money for that development from backers and has the say in which direction that development team takes. He worked on Debian a while ago and left because he disagreed with it. Now if you're developing for Ubuntu and you don't like his direction, leave and make MasterNerdGuyLinux or whatever you want to call it. No one's stopping you, the Linux kernel development marches on, what's the problem here?

Microsoft can't kill Linux and neither will Shuttleworth -- that's a testament to Linux. He can jeopardize his marketshare but at the end of the day I will argue that Shuttleworth has made a major positive impact on Linux despite my frank disagreement with his latest developments.

Re:Wait, How Does One 'Kill' Linux? (3, Funny)

interval1066 (668936) | about 2 years ago | (#42244013)

I think Shuttleworth would reply "We're not killing Linux, we're taking it into the next century."

Re:Wait, How Does One 'Kill' Linux? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244033)

Hur dur. Asbergers much? The GP was making somewhat of a joke, some what of an exaggeration for effect. Calm yourself.

Re:Wait, How Does One 'Kill' Linux? (3, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#42244241)

Why are you trying to kill Linux?

I'm confused, how exactly does one 'kill' Linux?

You're confused because you missed that word "trying" even though you quoted it. It's foolish to try killing Linux, thus this is a valid question if one perceives such actions.

Ubuntu has a lot of users. Indeed some software is released targeting only Ubuntu and claiming "Linux support". It's been shown time and again that folks go where the applications are... So, you take one of the arguably more user friendly versions of Linux, the one that my 75 year old retired air-force mechanic neighbor is using (Ubuntu 10.04) despite him being mostly computer illiterate, and then make a horrible cluster fuck of usability. Were it not for someone like me to assist in his migration to Mint, he'd have clicked "upgrade" and wound up with Unity. I let him try out Unity via 12.04 LiveCD, it's unusable to him. He'd have bought a new computer rather than cope with that shit... What do new computers come pre-installed with? Not Linux.

He can jeopardize his marketshare but at the end of the day I will argue that Shuttleworth has made a major positive impact on Linux despite my frank disagreement with his latest developments.

You just moved the goalposts. A life of good works does not excuse the occasional tyranny, corruption, or other immoral behavior.

Re:Wait, How Does One 'Kill' Linux? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#42244587)

I'm confused, how exactly does one 'kill' Linux? I thought that one of the beautiful aspects of the GPL is its robustness.

GPLv2 is not as robust as you might think. Sure, you have to make your source code available, but that translates to nothing useful if nobody but you is capable of compiling, modifying, or debugging that code. Here is the most commonly referenced example of how the GPLv2 fails its purpose:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TiVO [wikipedia.org]

GPLv3 closes this loophole, but there are likely further loopholes that could be exploited.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (1)

mlw4428 (1029576) | about 2 years ago | (#42243741)

Why are you bitching? First off it's not like Ubuntu can't be totally re-rolled to remove the components you don't want in it. Secondly you're not REQUIRED to use Ubuntu's flavor of distribution. You can go and get any of the number of "based off Ubuntu" distros out there. Linux Mint is one I personally prefer. I think it's exciting that someone is ignoring all of the "OH NOES IT MUST BE OPEN SOURCE AND IT MUST NOT DO ANYTHING AND IT MUST USE TEXT FILES FOR CONFIGURATION WAAAAAA" vitriol that accompanies Linux. People like me would LOVE to switch to 100% Linux, but it's missing things that Windows or Mac OSX offers. Just because I'm not part of the RMS fanboy club, it doesn't mean my wants/needs are any more or less important than anyone else's. That SHOULD be the beauty of Open Source -- trying out new ideas and if it doesn't work or it doesn't work the way YOU want it to work, then fork it and do your own thing. But for all that's holy, quit your bitching.

Re:Dear Ubuntu (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#42244693)

People like me would LOVE to switch to 100% Linux, but it's missing things that Windows or Mac OSX offers

Such as? Most of the issues that face GNU/Linux today are not the fault of the OS itself, but of ISVs and hardware makers whose software/drivers are only available for one or two OSes. Hardware vendors are probably the worst offenders here, as not only will they not release drivers for the Linux kernel, but they won't even release enough information about their hardware to enable someone else to write the driver for them.

Ubuntu is doing nothing to change that situation. Bundling nVidia's drivers and bundling Broadcom's drivers only reinforces those companies' views that they can go on releasing poorly-engineered drivers for Linux and that it is OK to be tight-lipped about the details of the hardware. Ubuntu has not yet demonstrated any ability to bring the software the people want to their own distro, let alone to do so in a way that would benefit anyone else.

Yeah, they are a business. Somehow, Red Hat, a much bigger business, has done a lot more to benefit the community -- they even have a policy of committing patches upstream except in certain, very limited cases. Where Red Hat fails to stand up for the community -- like with the UEFI bootloader restrictions -- Canonical has also failed. So what exactly are they doing to help us? Ask most people what is keeping them away from GNU/Linux (if they even know what it is), and they won't tell you that it's the lack of a pretty interface, nor will they tell you that they need an easy-to-use package manager; most will talk about applications and drivers.

"Dear Democrats (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243765)

Why do you hate America?"
—Republicans

Also, when did masternerdguy stop beating his wife?

Re:Dear Ubuntu (-1, Offtopic)

marylinfelton45 (2792231) | about 2 years ago | (#42244407)

Benjamin. I agree that Paula`s blog is nice... I just purchased a great Ford from earning $4226 this-past/five weeks and over ten-k lass month. this is definitely the easiest-work I've ever done. I began this 9-months ago and pretty much straight away was bringin home minimum $73 per-hr. I use this website..WWW.GoogleJob1.MEL7.COM

Linux is too mainstream now! (4, Insightful)

Fwipp (1473271) | about 2 years ago | (#42243347)

"Shuttleworth: I love design - and especially in combining ideas in ways that make them both better. A recent project was figuring out how we want to fit our phone, tablet and desktop stories into one coherent whole. I quite like the solution we came up with. Tell me if you like it after 14.04 LTS ;)"

Microsoft was doing this before it was cool!

Re:Linux is too mainstream now! (3, Interesting)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42243587)

... but they were doing it very badly. Really, I think they still are. Despite how badly I dislike some aspects of Unity, I think it's a slightly better effort than Microsoft has put out.

Re:Linux is too mainstream now! (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 years ago | (#42243981)

Despite how badly I dislike some aspects of Unity, I think it's a slightly better effort than Microsoft has put out.

And this, children, is called "damning with faint praise."

Also known as "clearing a bar buried six feet below the surface." ;)

Re:Linux is too mainstream now! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243761)

Microsoft... the pinnacle of imitation.... Always the best place to imitate if you wanna be innovatiERROR 509: TOO MUCH SARCASM!

Life In A Vaccuum (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243349)

Alright, all you depressed-hipsters, Mark has had enough of your bitching about Unity. He sees it as an improvement and says that the numbers show growth despite Unity, so STFU.

This attitude along with the Amazon Lens search spyware tells me the Ubuntu is done. It's up to you to make it happen. Will you make a stand or continue to be bleating sheep?

Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (4, Insightful)

Minter92 (148860) | about 2 years ago | (#42243359)

" The really interesting opportunity is to unify all of these different kinds of computing. Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer. "
That just sounds horribly efficient. The needs of the different types of computer platforms are all quite divergent. The small power saving OS on a tablet focused on user interactions has almost no relation to what is needed to run a petaflop computing platform. They may both be based off the same core kernel but to have the same code just seems daffy.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243649)

The answer is money. It's always money.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (5, Funny)

MrLeap (1014911) | about 2 years ago | (#42243703)

Perhaps what he's talking about is merely an interface that allows commands and things to be environment agnostic. A portable operating system interface, if you will. POSIX would be a good acronym.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (1)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | about 2 years ago | (#42243943)

Wish I had mod points to get you to +5 Funny.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243863)

Interestingly, a single "OS to rule them all" is working very well indeed.

My home router runs Linux. My phone runs Linux. My tablet would run Linux (if I had one). My desktop runs Linux. And "my" supercomputer runs Linux (top 100 of the Top500 a year ago, go team!). Or more accurately, Linux is the kernel for each of those devices. The user interface on top is not the same in all cases: router-Web, phone-Android, tablet-Android, desktop-X11/OpenBox, supercomputer-command-line access through a batch scheduler.

So what you really should be doubting is one user interface to rule them all. If that is what you meant, I agree. Canonical and Microsoft don't seem to be getting it. Apple and others do.

-Anon

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 2 years ago | (#42243927)

The key could go around user interfase personalization. Or different flavors of the same interface, but targetted for different input devices. Like KDE Plasma Active vs KDE.

In any case, there is always (will be?) the option to use another user interface.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (1)

ThePhilips (752041) | about 2 years ago | (#42244005)

The really interesting opportunity is to unify all of these different kinds of computing. Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer.

That just sounds horribly efficient. The needs of the different types of computer platforms are all quite divergent. The small power saving OS on a tablet focused on user interactions has almost no relation to what is needed to run a petaflop computing platform. They may both be based off the same core kernel but to have the same code just seems daffy.

Your example is already wrong.

Second largish group of Linux kernel developers interested in the power saving features was the HPC folks. Think of it, if you have a petaflop cluster, every saved watt on one node quickly translates into saved kilo/mega watts across the cluster. And the reason for interest is obvious: price of electricity keeps climbing up.

It went similarly with the hot-plug functionality: it's the same code in kernel which is responsible for the plug/unpug of a HDD on the storage and a USB stick on the desktop.

There is more to it than meets the eye.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (1)

Minter92 (148860) | about 2 years ago | (#42244669)

I guess I am not considering the linux kernel the OS in this case. My phone runs a version of the linux kernel as do the nodes on the supercomputer, but the many of the things around them are very different.

Re:Why one OS that runs everywhere?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244921)

A tablet should focus in interactivity. The kernel should respond to events as quickly as possible, throughput be damned. A supercomputer is the exact opposite end of the raw performance interactivity spectrum: crunch those numbers first, and then (if you have a break) look at the events/input.

Yes, power savings apply to everybody. But not everybody has the same needs in their kernel.

New question: (4, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | about 2 years ago | (#42243381)

What the hell, man?

Decent answers (2)

nebular (76369) | about 2 years ago | (#42243427)

Nice answers for the most part (except of curse for the cool hack question, kinda took a pass on that one). Little bit more than you would usually get from a corporate executive. Seemed to me like he answered the questions and got either a thumbs up or thumbs down from the lawyers.

Re:Decent answers (1)

AngryNick (891056) | about 2 years ago | (#42243845)

Nice answers for the most part (except of curse for the cool hack question, kinda took a pass on that one).

You must admit though, that was a pretty lame attempt to get him to say something "uncool".

Nothing like a rich white dude... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243451)

Nothing like a rich white dude living in South Africa to make me believe he really cares about freedoms.

Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243467)

"First introduced in Ubuntu 12.10, the "Home Lens" unified search feature inserts product recommendations from Amazon into the search results, irrespective of whether the user intended to search the web or local files.

This is just like the first surveillance practice I learned about in Windows," Stallman says, recalling how a friend first noticed the Microsoft OS phoning home with search queries.

That type of behavior is a strict no-no to the free software maven, who lumps it in with DRM and hidden back doors as malicious practices that should result in the offending code being treated as malware.

"The ads are not the core of the problem," Stallman writes. "The main issue is the spying. Canonical says it does not tell Amazon who searched for what. However, it is just as bad for Canonical to collect your personal information as it would have been for Amazon to collect it." - RMS from -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/07/stallman_on_ubuntu_spyware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

* That question's as FAIR AS IT GETS...

APK

P.S.=> Very curious what your reply would be vs. that statement - because, to myself @ least? He appears correct, & I don't see WHY a local diskbound query would EVER get sent out to a REMOTE server...

... apk

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243545)

This is why I use a HOSTS file to redirect all network traffic to 127.0.0.1! Nobody's gonna spy on me.

Posted using my colleague's computer.

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243593)

Attempt to be on topic please.

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244113)

I made fun of him in the last thread.. but it occurred to me.. these new posts are actually readable, and make sense. So either it's someone imporsonating APK, or APK has started taking medication.

So don't make fun... we wouldn't want him to skip a dose and start talking about HOSTS files again.

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244369)

You're instantly downmodded for your trolling, enjoy http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3304725&cid=42243545 [slashdot.org] and your continued attempts at illogical off topic ad hominem attacks only show you're a miserable person, nothing more.

You must enjoy being downmodded then... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244521)

"I made fun of him in the last thread " - by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10, @01:12PM (#42244113)

Per my subject-line above? You were downmodded for it yesterday too here, & you "played" yourself:

http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3304601&cid=42234527 [slashdot.org]

(Gosh - just like you were here today also!)

Yes - you must be a "glutton for punishment"... or, you have "issues" (of a psychological nature).

---

"So either it's someone imporsonating APK, or APK has started taking medication. So don't make fun... we wouldn't want him to skip a dose and start talking about HOSTS files again." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10, @01:12PM (#42244113)

Additionally - on taking meds??

Well - You've only shown us that you're an obsessed sicko troll that stalks me around this site like some mania obsessed nutcase, repeatedly...

(So I wouldn't talk meds, pal - you're clearly "projecting" your OWN hassles, along with stalking myself!)

Oh - & it's "impersonating", NOT "imporsonating"... & yes, you've tried that too, in the 1st link above.

APK

P.S.=> So, please - take YOUR meds, and quit projecting your own issues onto myself... & get professional help of a psychiatric/psychological nature!

... apk

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244141)

Your problem is that you seem to consider a search in the Dash a "local diskbound query". It is not. It's a "do what I mean" query. Ubuntu is for everyone, not just for nerds. Only nerds would even consider something to be a "local diskbound query". And those nerds who care know what it does. So nobody is being misled (and there's a notice on the same screen anyway).

The Dash did not exist before Canonical invented it. I think it's fair for them to define what it is.

I don't consider ANYTHING... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244335)

Until I hear BOTH SIDES (I heard RMS' already, now to hear Mr. Shuttleworth's)...

* That's all - hence, my question...

APK

P.S.=> You can attempt to "cut ME down" personally in calling me a "nerd" (maybe I am, maybe I am not) - that's how I perceived it.

However - You don't have a leg to stand on because of it, as ad hominem attacks are indeed, illogical!

I mean, hey - after all, I am ONLY ASKING A QUESTION, nothing more (for clarification from BOTH parties)...

... apk

Re:Is "RMS" correct on this note? apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42245021)

How could it be "do what I mean" if it sends my search info over the Internet when I'm searching for something on my hard drive?
That's certainly not "what I mean".

What about the most important question: (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243491)

When will you go fuck yourself!?

Tomorrow? Or next week?

Why not right away?

I don't get where he's coming from. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243493)

Yeah, I've been quite astonished at the level of vitriol and paranoia that pervades some of the opinion-fests that pass for discussion and debate in the FLOSS community. And quite disappointed that more folk don't appreciate that we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shift the world towards a much more open platform than ever before, but that nasty flaming of individuals who lead that effort, whether its me or anyone else, is totally counter-productive.

What a stupid thing to say.

Re:I don't get where he's coming from. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243695)

He's an egotistical twat, always has been. He sold a snake oil company for millions and lives like a god amongst exceedingly poor people. Poor in ways that we can't understand in the west. He's a nasty SOB, and nobody should have ever played into it.

Re:I don't get where he's coming from. (4, Insightful)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | about 2 years ago | (#42244027)

Is what he said wrong? I use Xubuntu because I dislike Unity, but I don't hate him or Canonical for it. I don't see how it can possibly be productive to spend time flaming him and Canonical instead of using or contributing to competing systems if you dislike their products that much. That's the beauty if Linux; I can run what I want and only what I want if I choose to take the time to configure my system properly.

The problem is baby steps. (4, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#42244793)

In The Netherlands, some broadcasters still have in their name "vereniging" (society/club). They were originally founded by people with a similar interest who wanted to make programs according to their world view for others. It was a sharing caring thing. NOT pure commerce. The US might have had the same but now it doesn't and BOY does it show. Dutch broadcasters had to be forced by law to stop just buying American shows to get ratings and instead make TV accordin to their individual mision statement. It is TV nobody wants to watch for the betterment of all...

So... which is better? The mega corps must watch TV or the educational TV? The answer is probably the BBC which is a bit of both.

Where are the baby steps? American TV didn't start out as interludes between the commercials but with every annual report financial report, the need for ad revenue to go up, the ads got more intrusive till a Fox CEO claimed going out of the room during commercials is the same as stealing. Now ads are not just before during and after the show or worked into it but actually overlaying the TV image. Every step people said "oh well, this isn't to bad, I just go to the toilet or zap" and every step it got worse.

The problem is that that this amazon unity lens, is advertising and advertisers NEVER EVER STOP. Give them they finger, they abuct your family and sell them for parts. Searching for your files in realtime is so 90's, why not index your files for faster searches? Why not send the index database to the cloud so you know all your files no matter where you are on whatever device? And why not pay for it with allowing someone to search for it for keywords they can link ads to? And just a link to a web page, why not upload the ads for faster viewing? Why not allow executable content as ads? Why not allow third parties to serve advertising?

Unlikely? Their are countless events were ordinary 3rd party browser ads have infected hundreds of thousands peoples PC because the perfectly normal safe site you visited decided a fraction of a cent for a banner was worth more then your computer security and their reputation.

Oh... but surely Ubuntu wouldn't... no of course not. And the same was said by newspapers like NRC quite recently, just before they infected their readers.

I am reminded of Mint. Mozilla Firefox ALREADY pushed advertising by installing google search by default, then Mint took over and made it hard to remove, ruining the search page in the process. They slightly improved their act but this is just baby steps. Whats next?

Stallman mentions in his response that he expected this of MS and MS has repeatedly been found sending data home in its various media players. Oh they removed it once people found out, claiming bugs or debug or whatever. But they keep on trying.

When you buy a Windows PC, you fork over a ton of cash and nobody involved cares because they shovel it full of crapware because that gives them a bit extra. MS did this too, even the pure Windows no OEM disc fully priced came with links to shopping sites and expensive ISP's. Sure, to help me... of course.

I really don't want my computing to turn into an airline experience were everything costs money, especially not since I switched to Linux years ago. I even tried OSX but was put of by the fact that tools that are free for Linux are all shareware on OSX. Yes, you might call me a cheap bastard but I grew up in a world were there were no ads on tv on sunday. I have been to the US for long enough to know advertising EVERYWHERE does NOT make the world a better place.

Ubuntu got big over the principles of free software and now is betraying it all for a few bucks and it gives everyone an excuse to stay with Windows and OSX because well, right now, neither of THEM sell your privacy quite so openly to the highest bidder.

Yes, you can remove it for now. Sure... baby steps. If this fails and it will, they will just try again and again and again. And that gets really old after a while.

Re:I don't get where he's coming from. (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#42244813)

I don't see how it can possibly be productive to spend time flaming him and Canonical instead of using or contributing to competing systems if you dislike their products that much

There are two problems with this sentiment:

  1. We are not in a competition. This community is supposed to be about sharing -- sharing code, sharing bandwidth, sharing disk space, etc. If we start competing like a bunch of little corporations, the whole community will fail.
  2. Canonical has an enormous number of users; what they do with Ubuntu has far-reaching implications. If they bundle Nvidia's proprietary drivers, they are basically telling Nvidia that millions of GNU/Linux users can be Nvidia's customers without Nvidia having to change their practices or release one iota of information about their hardware. An increasing number of people now associate GNU/Linux with Ubuntu; if Canonical bundles spyware, that leaves many people associating spyware with GNU/Linux.

Canonical cannot just march in and turn the entire community upside down just to create a more business-friendly desktop distro. There are valid complaints about Canonical's approach and what effect Canonical is having on the free software / open source community.

Unanswered questions (0)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 2 years ago | (#42243495)

I still want to know which Steam for Linux title he's going to download and play first.

Re:Unanswered questions (1)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | about 2 years ago | (#42244039)

Probably the only one available which wasn't already available for Linux, Team Fortress 2 (I may have made that up, it's possible that Serious Sam was previously unavailable for Linux).

One OS to rule them all (4, Insightful)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#42243509)

"The really interesting opportunity is to unify all of these different kinds of computing. Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer."

Is he serious? Haven't we learned anything from Microsoft's attempt to do the same thing with Windows 8?

Re:One OS to rule them all (3)

LourensV (856614) | about 2 years ago | (#42243923)

Well, it doesn't have to be technically the exact same set of bits, or even an exactly identical interface. What he seems to be getting at is that he wants to shift from a model of personal computing where you own a personal computer that you use in the privacy of your home and have full control of, to a model where you consume a set of interlinked services that are provided partially by devices you lease (e.g. a smart phone), partially by devices you own (tablet), and partially by servers run by third parties, with ultimate control of your actions and your data mostly in the hands of the service providers. This, of course, is the antithesis of the idea of Free Software.

Further down, he states "If your way of seeing the world IS genuinely more productive, effective, efficient, insightful and usable, then you should be confident that you will win in the long term" which is either naive or disingenuous, and incidentally a nice example of why RMS dislikes the term Open Source so much. Looking at the current state of GNU/Linux on the desktop and comparing that to Windows XP and Windows 7, I'm not so sure that GNU/Linux is any better (disclaimer, I have been running GNU/Linux exclusively since 1999, so I'm comparing between my machines and my coworkers'). But that is not the point, and that is not what the question was about. The question was about freedom, about controlling the computation and communication that is done on your behalf by your equipment. The fact that he sidesteps this question in much the same way that Jono Bacon sidestepped RMS's criticism of the new integrated Amazon search engine says a lot.

So here's one more attempt to get through to the fine folks at Canonical: the question is not about whether I want to be able to buy things from Amazon easily. The question is where else in the OS you are sending things that I type into my personal computer to some server on the Internet without me knowing about it, and how I can trust you to not do that without my knowledge or permission in the future? That is what Free Software is about. Unfortunately, Canonical seems to have a very different agenda.

Re:One OS to rule them all (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#42244677)

I think you should read the link in my signature.

Not that your point is off... just that that is not what Free Software is about. (It's a pleasant side-effect)

Re:One OS to rule them all (1)

Knuckles (8964) | about 2 years ago | (#42244627)

"Informative" mod is utterly wrong. If you had bothered to research what you are posting about (which would have been easy, as a Google query for "ubuntu phone" brings you right here [ubuntu.com] ), you would have known that Canonical is aiming for precisely the opposite of what MS tried. MS forces the phone interface on PC users, with the traditional Desktop being forced into Metro). Canonical wants to make it so that if you plug an external monitor/keyboard/mouse into your phone, your phone runs the appropriate PC UI for these devices (while continuing to run the phone UI on the phone in parallel)

Re:One OS to rule them all (2)

Svartalf (2997) | about 2 years ago | (#42244837)

If this were the case, why are they "innovating" with Unity, which is more suited to touchpads and touchscreens than a traditional usable Desktop UI?

So... (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#42243511)

Mark appears to be saying that Ubuntu will work in about a year and a half (all the references to 14.04LTS.)

As a Ubuntu user myself, I can't say I'm overly happy with the direction it's been in lately. I hope he's right.

Re:So... (3, Informative)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | about 2 years ago | (#42244055)

It works just fine right now. Install 12.04 LTS with KDE or XFCE instead of Unity and you avoid the sub-par Unity interface and the Amazon search integration.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#42244405)

Yes, but then you end up with KDE or XFCE. And in any case it's not Ubuntu in that sense any more.

There really wasn't a lot wrong with GNOME 2, I wish they'd have taken a more evolutionary approach to improving that. As it is, I take a similar route to yours, I use the GNOME fall-back mode with a few extensions loaded to improve Ubuntu integration. It's not proper Ubuntu, but it's at least a hell of a lot better than XFCE or KDE. And it's closer to what Ubuntu should be than Unity.

He just doesn't get it. (4, Interesting)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#42243605)

Unity is by far the most widely used shell on Ubuntu, despite the depressed-hipster "can't live with unity" meme.

Shuttleworth just doesn't get it...People don't like Unity because its not a highly productive DE (unlike MATE or Cinnamon). It has nothing to do with what is hip or cool.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (3, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | about 2 years ago | (#42243687)

If you are after highly productive and do not need the hand holding that things like Unity provide, why are you even using Ubuntu? Just use Debian.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (4, Insightful)

multicoregeneral (2618207) | about 2 years ago | (#42244257)

Ubuntu's repositories are more complete. But yes, I see your point.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (3, Interesting)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#42243699)

Not even that, it's a straightforward "We've changed everything and you have to relearn everything, but there's not really a substantial advantage to the replacement" thing.

Don't get me wrong, I think there are some good ideas in Unity, but I really am far from convinced that it was necessary to throw everything out and start again when building it. The only "justification" I can see is that they saw GNOME doing the same thing and thought this was the only way to move forward.

I'm not a Unity hater, but it's taken me a long time to be willing to use it anywhere (it's now my default UI at work), and I'm still relieved when I get home and can use my hybrid GNOME Classic desktop on my personal machine. I was extremely relieved by GNOME's recent decision to at least acknowledge that there are people out there who prefer a more ordinary desktop, and I hope we see those improvements in Ubuntu soon.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (3, Informative)

ak3ldama (554026) | about 2 years ago | (#42243827)

Unity is by far the most widely used shell on Ubuntu, despite the depressed-hipster "can't live with unity" meme.

This is very condescending. Caveat: I use it somewhat currently, but I do not like it.

And second, there was a cultural shift. Ubuntu shifted towards leadership rather than simply integration. We thought design was important, we talked to the folks responsible for all the current DEs at the time, and they didn't seem to understand what was going to be the reality of personal computing - a highly mobile oriented world. So we led, and I'm glad we did, even though it is hard to do that.

So you talked to other desktop environment groups about it, they said no thanks, and you've pushed on anyways? That seems fairly understandable actually. Thanks for the leadership?

Purpose built platforms work, well. When Unity and Gnome shell strip things like sensor and weather applets, they provide less value. When Ubuntu adds the new software center application that does software searches worse, they provide less value. When Gnome (3) provides less options for showing themes and options (oooh its in this barely known hack and install this thingy and edit this javascript) they provide less value. Providing more examples would just be depressing.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244481)

Unity has plenty of weather and sensor indicators btw.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243903)

I actually found that comment a bit disburbing. I don't care for the politics, i don't care what is popular, and i don't care which distro or DE is more popular.
Unity is terrible to use from a productivity standpoint, simple as that. His response is somewhat insulting.

I'm still running ubuntu on my servers, but have changed all desktops over to mint (work and home). Think I'll start looking at ditching it on the servers too.

No, you don't get it (1)

goruka (1721094) | about 2 years ago | (#42243967)

I do C++ development all day, I use restricted drivers (for wifi and OpenGL) and I use Ubuntu.
I've been using Debian since '97, used it for almost 10 years, I loved being in charge of my system and configuring every little thing and packages.
But at the end of the day, when you run regular distros, things often break when you less expect it, and are forced to figure out how to fix them. When you have to meet a deadline with a client and something breaks because installing a new package forced the upgrade of others that were not as tested, this is fatal.

So, I don't love Unity, I was fine with Gnome 2 and I couldn't care less about the integrated Amazon searches but the truth is that Ubuntu is by far the most tested of all the Linux distributions. This alone makes me much more productive.

Re:No, you don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244259)

Sure, sure... but why would I use Ubuntu, when I can easily use an Ubuntu-based distro (i.e. guaranteeing the advantages of Ubuntu in terms of testing and compatibility and whatnot) that actually cares about the user's opinion (e.g. Mint Linux)?

Re:He just doesn't get it. (1)

RedHat Rocky (94208) | about 2 years ago | (#42243969)

Really, Unity is like Old Windows back in the 90's, it's built towards simple use and does not contain anything beyond in terms of usability. One size fits all....NOT. Will leave the Microsoft bugs and evil arguments aside.

Making the decision and demanding that only producing something better is worth listening to...that's just silly.

Fact: made design
Fact: many have issues with said design

Re:He just doesn't get it. (1)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | about 2 years ago | (#42243979)

People don't like Unity because its not a highly productive DE

I really like MATE and didn't try Unity for more than 30 seconds.
Trying to use Unity as MATE sure isn't productive at all. :D
Honest question : can Unity be a highly productive DE when it's used as it should?

Re:He just doesn't get it. (2)

leplen (2469676) | about 2 years ago | (#42244065)

I find unity a highly productive DE. Workspaces work fine, I have the dock/unity bar/whatever only show up when I forget what workspace I put something on. It's not quite as customized as my Gnome2 set-up was, but it was easier to set up and works equally as well. Anecdotal evidence for the win and all, but I'm pretty happy with Unity from a productivity stand-point. I didn't much care for the versions pre-12.04, but by and large Unity stays out of my way, which is what I want from a DE.

Re:He just doesn't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244577)

If you're not willing to do real work to achieve the outcome you believe in, then you're just another empty vessel with an opinion.

That wasn't the song he sung when ubuntu was starting out, and I doubt he'll keep that attitude if people stop recommending ubuntu.

And quite disappointed that more folk don't appreciate that we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shift the world towards a much more open platform than ever before, but that nasty flaming of individuals who lead that effort, whether its me or anyone else, is totally counter-productive.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "Thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!

All devices are not created equal (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243637)

I'm all for standardizing as much as it makes sense to standardize. Anyone can recognize the advantages. Taken too far it is limiting.(Unity)

Software executives see an opportunity to lower development cost through standardization of UI across all devices. They sell it as a benefit and will push it way further than it should be pushed because it means more value for THEM.

A desktop is not a tablet is not a server is not a phone. You can't push the UI's for these systems into the same box without sacrificing usability, which is exactly what's happening. You take away value for the end consumer.

Shuttleworth is officially more interested in himself than the users his brand proports to be working for. The exodus from Ubuntu/Unity will continue.

Get rid of Shuttleworth while there is still time. I don't care if he is just following Apple/Microsoft/whomever. That is not a valid excuse.

Touch that again! (4, Insightful)

ciderbrew (1860166) | about 2 years ago | (#42243645)

Touch Screen on a desktop -- WHY? I've spent years asking people not to touch my screen now everyone smears their fingers over everything - Grrr.
And laptop the screen sizes, too small for you too?

Re:Touch that again! (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#42244305)

Touch Screen on a desktop -- WHY? I've spent years asking people not to touch my screen now everyone smears their fingers over everything - Grrr.

Yep. I feel the same way about most new interfaces. E.g.: I spent years trying not to jerk the game controller in response to actions on the screen. We laughed at folks who would lean left and right or pull the controller high into the air when their avatar hadn't jumped high enough. Now there are motion controlled games, and they're about three decades too late for me to care about. The younger folks however...

Re:Touch that again! (3, Insightful)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 2 years ago | (#42244731)

LOL. Yeah, here's the thing, though. I killed a half-hour at the Sony Store the other day playing with their tablets and what not and you know what? For web-browsing, etc, it's so much more user-friendly than keyboard + mouse. I had to catch myself on non-touch equipped screens and found myself actually *annoyed* that you couldn't just touch the screen to do basic stuff. I dunno if I'd use it for my IDE (although.. scrolling through code, pinch zooming to change font sizes... that might be a useful thing...). I think my android experience is tempering my old-man-ness.

Linaro, ARM & future (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243681)

ARM netbooks were promised some time ago. The first really competetive is Samsung's Chromebook, but when do the Ubuntu ARM netbooks arrive. I'd like to buy one with +8-hour battery life, Finnish keyboard and 3G, please. And hopefully it doesn't look like crap as I'd like to carry it around. I don't like 1366x768 displays but that's what you'll usually get (and what the Chromebook has).

PS. Maybe I should register myself a username.

Not impressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243773)

Unity is by far the most widely used shell on Ubuntu, despite the depressed-hipster "can't live with unity" meme.

Nice.

As a professional content creator, I need a flexible, customizable desktop. So he chooses to dismiss my legitimate (and very common) criticisms of Unity with a tired wave of the hand as merely coming from a "depressed hipster".

Oh, and reducing me to a meme -- that was a nice touch too.

Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer.

Good to know -- I'll be sure to stay away from that experiment.

I, on the other hand, will be seeking out OSes that are well-designed for the type of workload I have, and are well-tuned to the form factor that I use.

Re:Not impressed (2)

corychristison (951993) | about 2 years ago | (#42244163)

Good to know -- I'll be sure to stay away from that experiment.

I, on the other hand, will be seeking out OSes that are well-designed for the type of workload I have, and are well-tuned to the form factor that I use.

Well there are many choices. You don't say if you have a preference or not. Try out Arch, Slackware or even Gentoo/Funtoo.

Re:Not impressed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244705)

As a professional content creator, I need a flexible, customizable desktop.

No, you need applications that support your content creation.

I don't care how "productive" your desktop environment is, it's a minuscule part of your overall productivity. It's like saying, "I have all the tools necessary to build a house, but I REALLY can't get to building that house until I have the exact right toolbox with the exact right color, shape, and size that I want."

I'm guessing you're neither a very successful "content creator," nor a very good one. *Good* content creators don't bitch that their toolbox is all wrong and they just can't work. *Good* content creators are too busy creating content to whine about the fact that their fucking desktop ui isn't "just perfectly the way I want it."

And this is why you all sound like a bunch of twattish hipsters - you're far more concerned with form than with function: "The DE is ugly and clunky and evil and SPIES ON ME, I can't possibly get ANYTHING done with this computer!"

Confirmed what I suspected (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42243821)

we're the only company that really cares about the desktop

So he really is the truly arrogant asshole that I figured he must be.

Re:Confirmed what I suspected (2)

game kid (805301) | about 2 years ago | (#42243955)

Yeah, if the "depressed-hipster 'can't live with unity' meme" line didn't drill it in, Shuttleworth finished the job and made the big leagues [snopes.com] there. What a jerk.

Re:Confirmed what I suspected (1)

Knuckles (8964) | about 2 years ago | (#42244689)

So he really is the truly arrogant asshole that I figured he must be.

So which other alive Linux company cares for the desktop?

McCarthyism? (4, Insightful)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | about 2 years ago | (#42243893)

Well, I feel the same way about this as I do about McCarthyism. The people who rant about proprietary software are basically insecure about their own beliefs, and it's that fear that makes them so nastily critical.

So, who's being nastily critical? Comparing free software advocates to Joseph McCarthy? Great way to keep it classy, to rise above the fray.

McCarthy used the power of government to persecute people he distrusted or who were his political enemies. RMS complaining about the combination of free and propriety software is hardly comparable. As a matter of fact, those who leverage government to enforce vague patents, like vague accusations of communism, come much closer.

If your way of seeing the world IS genuinely more productive, effective, efficient, insightful and usable, then you should be confident that you will win in the long term, and folk who dabble in a different way of working will come to realize that you're right eventually.

Would that this were true. It is an old enlightenment superstition that, given enough time, truth will triumph on this earth. Truth, however, has no special claim on human beings. Power tends to be the victor more frequently. Your way of seeing the world can be the most insightful, but if government and corporatists together hold the means of spreading that way of seeing the world, you cannot communicate your insights to others.

Yet, there's a deeper problem with Shuttleworth's claim. The list he gives, "productive, effective, efficient, insightful and usable," these are all good things. But they are not the only good things. Nor would I use these as criteria for judging what is right. Most of these are only secondary goods. Productivity, effectiveness, and efficiency are only good when they're used to advance good ends. They are only desirable as a means to some other good. It is primary goods that offer the best criteria for us to "come to realize [what's] right". Primary goods are things that are desirable in themselves and not for the sake of some other good. Justice, for example, is desirable, whether or not it is productive or effective. Happiness should be sought, whether or not it is efficient. Some of the best things in life (e.g. sex, beer, science-fiction, art, religion, philosophy, playing with children, music, fishing, amiable conversation) are highly inefficient.

Were free software to base its claim to being the "right" way of doing things purely on productivity, efficiency, et al., then it would be impoverished. It would offer us nothing better than more stuff at a cheaper price. Of course it should strive to be productive and effective, usable and efficient, but only if it is providing some good. The fact that free software is free, that it can offer access to knowledge to those who want it, that it can in some small way ameliorate inequalities and injustices caused by those who through IP law claim ownership of the mind and of nature, that it is shared, these are the best claims free software has to make on being the "right" way of seeing the world. And, Mr. Shuttleworth, I am no McCarthyist for saying so.

You lost me at "depressed hipster" (5, Insightful)

branewalker (1665523) | about 2 years ago | (#42243933)

I think it's fine to be proud of your own accomplishments. I don't think it's fine to call your detractors "depressed hipsters" when that is precisely what they are not. I didn't like Unity before it was cool, because I've never liked it, and it's still not.

I think it's disingenuous at best to say "Unity is by far the most widely used shell on Ubuntu, despite the depressed-hipster "can't live with unity" meme." when it is the default shell for Ubuntu. Most people don't change defaults, even if they are bad. See: Internet Explorer.

I also think it displays a complete lack of understanding of FOSS to say, "Well, I feel the same way about this as I do about McCarthyism. The people who rant about proprietary software are basically insecure about their own beliefs, and it's that fear that makes them so nastily critical. If your way of seeing the world IS genuinely more productive, effective, efficient, insightful and usable, then you should be confident that you will win in the long term, and folk who dabble in a different way of working will come to realize that you're right eventually."

Really, Mark? Here's where you're wrong: the ideology is one of control and user rights. If you're leading and you say, "this method is productive, effective, efficient, (insightful? What does it mean for a method of creating software to *itself* have insight?), and usable," but fails to recognize basic user rights, and your detractors say, "yes, but it fails to recognize basic user rights" then you're talking past them, and telling them their rights don't matter in the face of what..."progress?"

When you've got a method that puts users first, or at the very least doesn't bundle advertising spyware and beta-level UI as defaults, piggybacking on the success of what used to be the friendliest flavor of Linux, then talk about productive and efficient. Because until you're moving in the right direction, how fast and efficiently you're moving doesn't matter.

I don't use Ubuntu... (1)

corychristison (951993) | about 2 years ago | (#42244093)

I don't use Ubuntu but I have a great deal of respect for anyone (for personal gain or not) who has contributed as much as Mark has both financially and in terms of open code for the community to use and learn from.

So a big Thank You goes out to Mark Shuttleworth, for all you have done.

I don't use Ubuntu because it is a matter of comfort and choice. I like choices and have no problem doing things the hard way, so I use Gentoo/Funtoo Linux (even though they provide some great tools to make it easy to manage my systems). Choice is what I like most about the Linux/FLOSS community.

Re:I don't use Ubuntu... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244421)

What exactly has Mark contributed?

Ubuntu ranks terribly in terms of contributions to the Linux Kernel, and Canonical suffers from an advanced case of NIH - just look at Unity vs Gnome 3. Add that to the fact that nobody really likes the things they do create, and I have a hard time seeing exactly what good Ubuntu has done.

Re:I don't use Ubuntu... (1)

corychristison (951993) | about 2 years ago | (#42244835)

He has pumped a lot of money into the community (regardless if he's setting himself up to make more, he's taking a hell of a gamble).

They have dedicated full time staff working on stuff they give away for free.

Ubuntu is workong with hardware and software companies to bring things to Ubuntu (usable by anyone who uses Linux, not just Ubuntu).

Giving people freedom of choice is what open source is all about, and Ubuntu has exposed very many people to this ecosystem (per se).

He still doesn't get it. (1, Interesting)

multicoregeneral (2618207) | about 2 years ago | (#42244225)

If you're not willing to do real work to achieve the outcome you believe in, then you're just another empty vessel with an opinion. And as the saying goes, opinions are like assholes - everybody's got one. What matters is the people who are willing to knuckle down and do real work to make a difference.

As expected, Mark Shuttleworth is again demonstrating his obtuse ceaselessness. People get upset when their voices are ignored. In this case, like it or not, these are his customers that he's ignoring. But, thankfully, he doesn't see it that way. They're just empty vessels with assholes, and if you don't like the way Ubuntu does things, you can GTFO. Intentionally alienating your users/customers is the worst possible thing he could do for the adoption of his product. I've said it before. I'll say it again. Only a an absolute moron would run his business this way.

Revealing attitude (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244345)

we're the only company that really cares about the desktop

I though this was the most revealing quote of the interview.

And I think he really does believe that.

The Henry Ford UI paradigm (3, Informative)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#42244379)

It used to be that all of the popular desktop operating systems – Windows, Linux, and even MacOS – offered a good degree of customizability. Except on Linux you didn't have to delve into the depths of configuration files, but you could change things if you wanted to. This was because the interfaces were designed by programmers who understood the need for flexibility.

The rise of self-proclaimed UI designers and UI experts has changed all that. Now the trend across the board is to pitch the user interface to the lowest common denominator, and when power users complain, not only to ignore their complaints but to actively insult them. We see this with the removal of the Start menu on Windows 8 and the shoving of "Metro" down everyone's throat, and we see this with Mark Shuttleworth's blithe dismissal of Unity critics as "depressed hipsters."

The truth is that people who don't care much about computers and use them mostly as content-consumption devices are already flocking to tablets and smartphones. On these devices, a simplistic UI is fine – but the corollary is that the desktop market will be more dominated by content creators and power users, who aren't satisfied with the limitations of portable devices. So offering customizability and giving power users what we want on the desktop is more important, not less. Anyone who tries to go after both the tablet and desktop market with a lowest-common-denominator strategy is likely going to lose both.

Re:The Henry Ford UI paradigm (1)

ak3ldama (554026) | about 2 years ago | (#42244663)

The truth is that people who don't care much about computers and use them mostly as content-consumption devices are already flocking to tablets and smartphones. On these devices, a simplistic UI is fine – but the corollary is that the desktop market will be more dominated by content creators and power users, who aren't satisfied with the limitations of portable devices. So offering customizability and giving power users what we want on the desktop is more important, not less. Anyone who tries to go after both the tablet and desktop market with a lowest-common-denominator strategy is likely going to lose both.

Completely agree...The answer to the "intrusion" of tablets into the computing world is not to ruin the personal computer when used as such. Further when someone purchases a 27" all in one computer, is it really the same thing as a 10" tablet? Even if it has touch support? Do those two uses need to live under the same constraints? Does the classic - and predominant - set of hardware need to be heavily comprimised to please that 27" touch screen that likely still sits on a desk 3 feet away from the user? Would it be better if we all just went to sleep for five years and woke up, why do these processes which affect us all so much have to be handled so badly?

Synicism and sarcasm are not healthy or very constructive: I still use Unity and Gnome Shell but I want them to work better, for more people, not less.

Hmmm (1)

tgd (2822) | about 2 years ago | (#42244403)

The really interesting opportunity is to unify all of these different kinds of computing. Let's make one OS that runs on the phone AND on your supercomputer

Like... Windows 8?

Not trying to suggest its not good for Ubuntu to do so, but does he really not understand that a) its not a new idea and b) already exists? Is he answering /. questions with marketing-quality responses?

Taken Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244583)

Mark has done a lot for Linux. I shudder at the thought of where it hade been., hadn't the Ubuntu project started. Now, let's innovate even more. We may not all like it, all the time, but as long as the poweruser can turn off certain functions i don't care. To you who whine at everything Ubuntu tries and tests, go and buy windows 8 instead..

Wish he'd have been asked directly about Amazon (2)

jalefkowit (101585) | about 2 years ago | (#42244607)

Full disclosure: I'm a happy Ubuntu user, I actually like Unity, and while I respect RMS' opinion I think the controversy over Canonical including Amazon search results in the Dash has been overblown.

All that being said, I'm disappointed that Shuttleworth wasn't questioned directly about the Amazon integration issue. It was mentioned, but only as one item in a longer list of gripes the submitter had, which allowed Shuttleworth to dance past the issue by talking about how the submitter's gripes were unrepresentative of the public at large ("Ubuntu continues to grow in terms of actual users", etc). If he'd been asked directly to comment on the Amazon decision and the community's response to it, he'd have had less room to wiggle away into generalities.

It's disappointing because (again, even though I personally think it's overblown) the Amazon issue is undeniably the biggest PR hit Ubuntu has taken in a long time; it is directly affecting its perception and standing in the Linux community, which makes it important enough that Shuttleworth should have to talk specifically about why the project has gone in that direction, and how that decision is going to continue to play out in the future.

How Much Did this Post Cost You? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42244965)

I wonder how much Dice sold this slashdot post to you for? I'm sure it's at a better rate than Apple and Microsoft, but since we only see crap from Canonical, Apple and Microsoft on here, in between n00b questions, I was just wondering...

I can understand the need to make money from slashdot, but at the same time, whoring out the news stories to this degree is a joke.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?