Ubuntu: “We’re not Linux”

[smr54]

Do you folks really think that Ubuntu has done nothing for Linux? Do you think it's Fedora that is making laptop hardware vendors look at Linux?

Y'know, it seems as if, rather than being glad for their success, and the fact that it's helping make Linux mainstream, folks want it to fail.

I personally know a couple of sysadmins who switched from RH or CentOS to Ubuntu servers, mainly because they are becoming concerned about how quickly RH will slip in Fedora things that really have no place in a server.

I also notice job postings are, more than before, saying RH and/or Ubuntu, which is something I've only seen in the last 6 months.

The better any of them do, the better for all of us. Even Oracle, with its willingness to indemnify clients against patent lawsuits---RH does the same thing, but everyone knows that Oracle is merciless and no one wants to mess with them.

If Ubuntu aims at the inexperienced, it gets people using Linux for the first time, which gets vendors more willing to support it.

I suspect that the willingness of the mainframe and server vendors to support Linux is due almost entirely to RH, and the fact that they're now a billion dollar company is great, and will help keep hardware vendors interested in supporting Linux.

If Mr. Shuttleworth makes no money and stops supporting Ubuntu, that will be felt through the Linux world too, so really you folks should be hoping it does become more of a commercial success.

Point being that both of them, in my not at all humble opinion, have done tremendous things for all opensource users.

Originally Posted by smr54

Do you folks really think that Ubuntu has done nothing for Linux? Do you think it's Fedora that is making laptop hardware vendors look at Linux?

Y'know, it seems as if, rather than being glad for their success, and the fact that it's helping make Linux mainstream, folks want it to fail.

I personally know a couple of sysadmins who switched from RH or CentOS to Ubuntu servers, mainly because they are becoming concerned about how quickly RH will slip in Fedora things that really have no place in a server.

I also notice job postings are, more than before, saying RH and/or Ubuntu, which is something I've only seen in the last 6 months.

The better any of them do, the better for all of us. Even Oracle, with its willingness to indemnify clients against patent lawsuits---RH does the same thing, but everyone knows that Oracle is merciless and no one wants to mess with them.

If Ubuntu aims at the inexperienced, it gets people using Linux for the first time, which gets vendors more willing to support it.

I suspect that the willingness of the mainframe and server vendors to support Linux is due almost entirely to RH, and the fact that they're now a billion dollar company is great, and will help keep hardware vendors interested in supporting Linux.

If Mr. Shuttleworth makes no money and stops supporting Ubuntu, that will be felt through the Linux world too, so really you folks should be hoping it does become more of a commercial success.

Point being that both of them, in my not at all humble opinion, have done tremendous things for all opensource users.

name me a few things that Ubuntu have done thats been " Tremendous "

[dd_wizard]

Popularizing Linux comes to mind... But it's hard to argue with the statistics when it comes to kernel commits. I find it understandable that a lot of people were offended by some of Shuttleworth's remarks, I was among them. But smr54 has a point, Ubuntu's popularity has been a big plus for the Linux community in general.

dd_wizard

[TK492]

In all fairness, Ubuntu was what made me try out Linux in the first place 2 years ago. Their Wubi installer was noob friendly and allowed for a relatively easy and harm-free test drive for longtime Windows users with no prior experience with dual-booting and virtualisation. I can't deny that the community is tremendously helpful as most often, when you Google a Linux problem, you fall on their forums or wiki pages. Ubuntu also allows for a fuss-free post installation as drivers and codecs are already installed and make for an easy transition once again for Windows users. Basically it does the job well to not scare away new users and as many people have said, that is what they do best: attract new-comers.

That being said, I've since then moved on after having letting go of the training wheels. I now have a Debian secondary machine beside me and Fedora is my new main operating system. No more Windows. It all starts with little steps before you get to run. Because of that, I can't deny Ubuntu for the good they have done of allowing me the chance to step into the world of Linux. Of course, I no longer respect Ubuntu as much because of choices they have made and the direction they are now taking. However, if they are still able to attract new users who will then contribute various projects and distributions, I say the hell with it; that alone is a tremendous contribution to Linux.

*end of personal experience

[BBQdave]

Originally Posted by TK492

I've since then moved on after having letting go of the training wheels.

Yeah, Ubuntu, the party hat on Debian. But hey, if the spinning propeller hat gets you involved in GNU/Linux, it's all good

I think sometimes that is what comes off as ill. Ubuntu gives the impression that Debian is raw and rough (incomplete), and through Ubuntu, Debian becomes a distro.

I know what Debian is without Ubuntu, not sure what Ubuntu is without Debian.

[TK492]

Originally Posted by BBQdave

I know what Debian is without Ubuntu, not sure what Ubuntu is without Debian.

I agree with you here. It is a big misconception and I believe that Ubuntu takes more credit than it deserves. New users will buy into it, but only for a while. It wouldn't take long for someone to realize that Debian is what drives a lot of the major distributions, not the other way around.

[BBQdave]

Originally Posted by TK492

I now have a Debian secondary machine beside me and Fedora is my new main operating system.

Funny, but I have the same going on. My main distro is Debian 6 on old hardware; soon to have new hardware and Fedora 16 (17 maybe). Will compare, than maybe make the transition to Fedora as my main distro.

I gotta tell you though, I really like Synaptic Package Manager. And Debian 6 with backports is a solid system.
So I'll have to check out Gnome 3 and yum (again - I got into the GNU/Linux world with Yellow Dog Linux)

[nonamedotc]

Originally Posted by dd_wizard

Popularizing Linux comes to mind... But it's hard to argue with the statistics when it comes to kernel commits. I find it understandable that a lot of people were offended by some of Shuttleworth's remarks, I was among them. But smr54 has a point, Ubuntu's popularity has been a big plus for the Linux community in general.

dd_wizard

Very true. I know that canonical had Ubuntu installation CDs in garment store cash counters (in India, few years back) for people to take and try. That was the first time many people (my parents' generation) knew that there were "free" operating systems and one does not have to pay huge amounts for to buy Windows.

Ubuntu really did quite a bit to popularize Linux.

[aleph]

My personal philosophy is: "forget more popular; show me better." Therefore I don't buy into Ubuntu's way of doing things.

Ubuntu is 80% marketing with 20% real stuff.

[arturoui]

Originally Posted by leepaul

Ubuntu contributes virtually nothing to kernel,org or gnome.org, they are parasites that use others code and take all the credit for others hard work.
Fedora contributes directly to kernel,org and gnome.org helping to further the development.

IMO ubuntu should be renamed "Parasite Linux" (note the lack of smilies as I'm not joking).

That gets my vote, I've always believed that and it looks like the ubuntu(intended lack of capitalisation) shower are finally beginning to show their true colours.

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by smr54

Do you folks really think that Ubuntu has done nothing for Linux?

I don't think anyone here is saying that they've done nothing for Linux, just that they haven't done anywhere near enough as others (e.g. Red Hat).

Originally Posted by smr54

Do you think it's Fedora that is making laptop hardware vendors look at Linux?

No, that would be Red Hat: http://www.pcworld.com/article/17318...hat_linux.html

That;'s right, Dell was selling laptops with Red Hat Linux installed way back in 2000, long before Ubuntu came around. In fact, I'd argue that it is precisely the success of Red Hat in the enterprise that made Linux be taken seriously enough so that PC vendors would even consider Linux (including Ubuntu). Mark Shuttleworth should get down on his knees every night before he goes to bed and give thanks for Red Hat (and, to a lesser extent, Novell with their SLES) for making Linux an acceptable OS in the eyes of hardware vendors.

Originally Posted by smr54

I personally know a couple of sysadmins who switched from RH or CentOS to Ubuntu servers, mainly because they are becoming concerned about how quickly RH will slip in Fedora things that really have no place in a server.

Nice anecdote. I'm sure lots of people here have anecdotes going one way or the other. In contrast, I prefer the data that says Red Hat is now a billion dollar business while Canonical...well, let's not even go there. And frankly, if these sysadmins you know are switching to Ubuntu (!) because of what they think Red Hat may copy from Fedora, while ignoring all the things that Ubuntu itself contains that "have no place in a server", then I'd question their judgment as sysadmins at the very least.

As far as Ubuntu being responsible for "making Linux popular," again there will of course be anecdotes but there's also quite a bit of revisionism and mythology surrounding that (promoted by Ubuntu fanboys and, no doubt, by Canonical itself), as well as just plain ignorance. There were "easy" Linux distros before Ubuntu, both free (e.g. Mandrake, PCLinuxOS) and commercial (e.g. Corel Linux, Xandros), and they all played some role in making Linux more accessible. And Ubuntu has as well. But again I'd argue that the success of Red Hat was the primary factor in putting Linux even in a position to become popular; they made Linux a mainstream name, especially with their near record-setting IPO in 1999, the eighth-biggest in the history of Wall Street. And Fedora is the most widely-used Linux distro, by a wide margin (roughly twice as many installations as Ubuntu). Ubuntu may get a lot of distrowatch hits and have some vocal supporters on sites like slashdot and reddit, but overall the Red Hat/Fedora family (including CentOS) is the primary force in the Linux world.

[sanhozay]

Originally Posted by RupertPupkin

all the things that Ubuntu itself contains that "have no place in a server"

What are these things that have no place in a server?

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by sanhozay

What are these things that have no place in a server?

Unity, for one.

[sanhozay]

Ubuntu Server doesn't have Unity, or any desktop environment for that matter. It has the things you'd expect on a Linux-based server: FTP, Samba, NFS, CUPS, Apache HTTPD, MySQL, Tomcat, etc, etc.

https://help.ubuntu.com/11.10/serverguide/C/index.html

Obviously you could install Unity or Gnome Shell if you really wanted to but remote management is the solution that is promoted. Canonical have a commercial offering called Landscape but lots of people use tools like Webmin to administer Ubuntu Server.

[RupertPupkin]

Originally Posted by sanhozay

Ubuntu Server doesn't have Unity, or any desktop environment for that matter.

Ah, but you see, smr54's sysadmin friends are concerned about what may be included in the future based on the direction of the distro, not what's actually in it right now.