This may not surprise some and others yes, maybe the fanboys will come out with pikes and torches to defend Ubuntu, but this decision you are taking Canonical it is nowhere good or accurate, not in my opinion.
First of all, I clarify that I am an Ubuntu user, I like the distro and I know how to use it beyond what a normal user knows, so comments from "You are noob for using Ubuntu, Ubuntu sucks" things like that, abstain, if they are going to comment better do it with bases.
And flat, i don't like this idea simply because it totally goes against the development of a Linux distribution and excludes the developer community, relegating them only to being Ubuntu app programmers, which seems disrespectful to me. I will not deny that for me, Unity has been improving or that the Amazon integration by default it is a mistake (in my view), but this from "Make the development process private" It seems to me total nonsense, let's see the reasons:
"We realized that critics are always going to be critical, whether you discuss new ideas with them or not"
That's what Mark Shuttleworth says on the subject. Well, as Jack the Ripper said, let's go in parts:
First of all, and let it be clear: keeping the development process private does not mean that they will shut down Ubuntu code That's for the tabloids who sometimes read just the title and run to comment. In simple words, they are not going to say what they are doing or anything until they post everything, including code.
Now, the critics are going to be critical ... So is it wrong for someone to criticize what Canonical does and they can't convince him otherwise? I am sorry but that is a very authoritarian position, I must say, and I do not see it favorably.
Some say it is an attempt by Canonical to get more publicity, as speculation is going to be flying throughout the development cycle and when it falls all day of launch we will see how the reviews, both good and bad, explode. And since the changes could not have been scrutinized while they were shown in the development, the discussion among the members of the community will be more explosive.
The truth is that I, very personally speaking, do not support this decision at all and it seems to me a terrible move that does not speak well of Canonical or Mark Shuttleworth because first it shows that in the long run it does not matter to him the value that ideas have and / or reviews from the community, both good and bad. It also shows that more and more people will want to implement a more and more authoritarian development cycle, which does not seem right to me either. They show a total disregard for the contributions that the community can make to Ubuntu relegating them to simple programmers of apps or functionalities for the user (it is not that being front-end is simple or bad, but that those who are not front, will not be able to do what they like). Also the fact of that possible search for advertising, but generating flames like it doesn't add up to me a bit.
It is something very mine and from where for now, I can not get too many more things without being redundant. What if I would like to see what you think about it.
Source: FayerWayer.
It would be good if you left a link to the original news. Cheers
List the source, my mistake.
The contributions that any distro can make to the community is appreciated, but the truth is that Ubuntu is no longer what it was before. At this moment I am testing version 12.10 and the truth has happened to me the same as for about 4 versions; crashes, crashes and more crashes.
I started in this distro and the truth is a bit sad that for a few years I have not used it except for testing. Hopefully with less criticism they begin to focus on functionality and not restrict their users (which they have not done in their latest versions). Thanks for the info.
That's why I haven't tried the new version yet. Out of curiosity, what crashes does it give you?
Well, the truth is I don't like unity, coupled with the fact that the software center wouldn't let me install even Dropbox and since I have a lot of Data Structure homework, I didn't stop too much Testing it.
The archive-manager also crashed me in two zip extractions. I didn't pay too much attention to them because I'm very pressured in school with some projects on recursion so I just focused on seeing what's new, but don't put up with it for long.
In fact the same thing happened to me in Elementary Luna (for the same reason that it is based on Ubuntu) and I also did not last long having it.
Yes, it is always a problem in the beginning. I want to go to Debian KDE, I don't know, I'll have to see when I have time to fully migrate.
I am not interested in hiding development, "he who burns himself with milk, sees the cow and cries." I don't like ubuntu, wherever you look at it. I stay in debian testing. In fact, I'm testing Solydxk, and it works great.
Things will still creep in. We'll find out before the final version comes out. On the other hand, how are the betas going to come out then ???
They are going to sneak in, I'm sure, although the betas and alphas ... no idea how they will
Not too long ago, Ubuntu asked users for ideas to help improve its product, but I think Ubuntu has matured and now has quite marked market objectives and a strategy to follow to achieve it, for this, it usually makes small changes (such as putting the maximize buttons, etc. of the windows on the left), which a priori tend to annoy users, and then implement them in a deeper change (Unity).
I think that is the main reason for this decision, Ubuntu will continue to implement changes little by little, to differentiate itself from other distros, and be able to show "its" concept of Ubuntu distribution.
For all those who are not satisfied, there are numerous distributions geared towards all types of users, and Canonical is aware of this.
Although some changes in Ubuntu may seem silly / barbaric / nonsense, Canonical knows what it is doing, and it has everything well studied.
What I don't know is what he will think of the alphas and betas versions, if he will have to show the changes in them ...
The reason is that they have their commercial objectives well marked, in that I am not going to discuss because it is something from Canonical that I like, it allows me to handle myself in a Linux environment but having a system with a commercial focus.
The thing is in that "there are other distros and Canonical knows it", I do not think nor am I going to think so because this way of reacting to criticism does not say anything good, I am sorry but they really tell me "to avoid criticizing me for something, I better not tell you anything »does not show seriousness in anything and is even silly due to the fact of what has already been mentioned with the betas, are you going to launch capped betas without the new functionalities? When are you going to test them, when are they implemented? That's ridiculous.
I'm not going to tire of saying it, this is a terrible Canonical decision in my view. You can have everything carefully studied, but that does not give the assurance that the decision is the correct one.
I agree with the opinion of zerberros, Ubuntu is targeting one sector and improving to be different. Personally, I like Ubuntu on my laptop for the basics, chakra for my desktop pc for everything and to fiddle and learn Debian, on home servers for anything.
"Not too long ago, Ubuntu was asking users for ideas to help improve their product"
It's true, now Canonical is asking for donations… Why are we going to fool around.
And if the critics are always going to be critical ... then why do chirimbas turn their backs on their community and their users? Anyway, if the critics (usually trolls) are going to criticize Ubuntu, they will do it the same either today or in 6 months ...
haters gonna hate and trolls gonna troll us!
For me the problem as such is the reaction to criticism. If they are clear that they are going to criticize them in any way, why do they cry and decide not to prove anything? I prefer to continue getting feedback and period, in the long run those criticisms are not going to change the results, or not drastically. He seems immature to me above many other things.
«I prefer to continue getting feedback» ...
When criticism is criticism for criticism itself, how do you determine objective and beneficial feedback?
An example of the positive was the Shopping lens issue, but negative examples abound as well.
http://goo.gl/ySO9L This is the original note from Shuttleworth, as you will see, it is quite different from what has been published so far.
I am an Ubuntu user and I do not like this decision by Canonical so much but as zerberros says, they must have a well-defined work plan as to what they want to do. Outside of that, I don't find any problem with them wanting to do things like that. I agree with zerberros also when he says that Canonical knows that there are other distributions for those who do not want to follow Ubuntu. In addition, for those of us who like Ubuntu but sometimes find Unity uncomfortable, other desktop environments such as GNOME can also be installed, which is the one I currently use and which, despite what they say that GNOME cannot be edited as before , Yes you can. Likewise, there are other versions of Ubuntu such as Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc. All this I say as a user, not as a developer, programmer, etc. I understand that they may have their opinions and their reasons for not liking this decision but well… I don't think anything can be done about it although there are alternatives that can be used to complain about what we don't like, like the Ubuntu forum. I believe Canonical continues to listen to users but, as I mentioned, they have a market and strategies ahead that they must follow. If you want to reach the user in general, the best we can do as a community is to support.
Well, if during the development process they do not count anything and we, the users, will not be able to comment on which path the distribution takes, we will have to do it when it comes out, right? The criticisms are going to have them yes or yes.
It is a decision that you may like or not but that you have to accept, and as they have already said here canonical knows very well what is done
He doesn't know what he's doing, he knows what his plans are ... the problem is in wanting to trust that and well, my question lies in how are they going to keep the development of this distro secret if they have to make alphas and betas? Will they make alphas and closed betas for a few?
And what will happen to the distros that depend on ubuntu (like elemntary OS for example)? I guess developing them will be more difficult now, right?
Yes but no. Canonical will surely keep Unity-oriented development a secret, but Ubuntu's foundations and structure, I think, will not be affected.
Well, as you say, it is a failure for the developers who are going to have to settle for creating the apps, which hurts
And how would they obtain the necessary Feedback for the correction of errors? I don't know, this sounds kind of strange to me, I don't see any sense: S
In short, the truth is that Canonical seems more Apple every day. Will it end up closing the Unity code? With this news, the possibility remains in the air.
The truth is that Canonical in recent times has done a lot of disservice in its commitment to Open Source.
As a user of KDE and Fedora, I prefer these two communities that have always maintained their commitment to open source and their respective communities.
It remains in the air, but I doubt that they will close the Unity code, I say it because they would lose.
I would like you to close the project a bit so that there is not so much fragmentation, which is what will ultimately destroy ubuntu, they should somehow prevent you from creating remixes of ubuntu with different skin, because if you continue like this, they will never reach 200 million users but 200 million derivatives and I think that takes away recognition of the ubuntu brand
Another with the tale of fragmentation. So Kubuntu, Lubuntu and Xubuntu are bad? Come on, what you say has no place. "Close development a bit to avoid remixes", that would make Ubuntu another closed system.
Absolutely right.
Initial comments on Unity made Ubuntu less popular ...
Then the users (like me) saw that it was not as bad as they said ...
Simple: Now bad (or good) expectations will not be created….
No doubt this bothers a few of us, and the annoyances will surely continue!
regards
It is true, the bad disposition of those who do not support Ubuntu always ends up having weight, of course it does, but I do not think that closing the doors temporarily until the moment of showing the result is the correct decision.
This smells funny. All my life I have liked Ubuntu, nowadays not so much, but it doesn't seem bad to me.
However, this decision does not make sense.
The decision does not make any sense. And in fact, if it had not been for all the criticism that arose around the famous Lens, there would not be an option to deactivate it, the connections would continue to be made unencrypted and if it were not for someone letting them know that what they were doing with the private data Without the consent of the users it was illegal, now they would surely be in court.
Apart from that, as they have said above, Feedback is necessary, doing it in secret the most they will achieve is to increase the problems and, consequently, more negative reviews.
If they were sure of what they were doing, there would be no problem in continuing to do things publicly. The only reason that could lead them to hide is that they know perfectly well that what they intend to do next will be highly objectionable and not in a good way precisely.
Ubuntu is a distribution that wants to put its foot to windows and mac in one way or another, to become the largest GNU / Linux distro, this is not bad on the contrary it is good and what Mr. Mark Shuttleworth has said is that they They must first beat mac, which is better than windows, and then microsoft, I think Ubuntu is on the right track but they must make decisions that more than one Ubuntu user will not like and neither will free software, I I am a Kubuntu user at the moment I am very happy with the advances of KDE and this distro that really surprises me more and more. I remember at that time that I used Ubuntu 10.04 I lived happy with that version, I think it was the last great version before removing gnome 2 and that 10.10 also used gnome 2 but for me 10.04 is very excellent.
Being better than Mac implies dedicating more time to its releases, and that is achieved, well, dedicating more fucking time xD ... I'm one of those who has always said that with one Ubuntu release a year is more than enough, it gives you the time For users to use the system without being tempted to change, it gives developers enough time to work more smoothly and have a much more polished product ... something like LTS.
Moreover, if they want to compete with Mac, they must offer a version every 2 years with 10 years of support and then in each version try to keep the system as current as possible and offer possibilities to various proprietary solutions such as Photoshop.
If Canonical does that, it will undoubtedly gain fans to bust, more so for free.
What you say about releasing a version every 2 years is what all non-Rolling distros should do. How much I miss Pardus and the best thing is that the apps were kept up to date with a stable and solid base.
I also miss Pardus a lot, what a beautiful and excellent distro, for now I'm in Kubuntu because I really love KDE and I don't want to leave it for nothing and because Kubuntu has shown good performance with KDE, also OpenSUSE, an excellent distro!
I think that was one of the reasons why Ubuntu was created, Debian's long update periods
No distro ever reveals its development cycle, both Fedora, OpenSuse, Mageia, etc ..., release their versions when they are in beta and stable so that everyone can see the changes later, Ubuntu is the only one that has always done it So, and now for being like the others you criticize it? The truth is that I do not understand you.
it is for that of the «community»
That's not true at all. OpenSuse has a development cycle in which it releases its famous Milestones to the public, which are the pre-beta phases, and Mageia if there is one thing that is characterized by its transparency and openness towards the user community (we can practically say it is the antithesis of Canonical), and they also release their Alpha versions. So no, Ubuntu was not the special one.
kike
It is the most normal that the distros publish what changes they intend to introduce in the new versions, that the blogger-news world does not pay attention to them is different, but many (not to generalize when saying "all") do.
The Ubuntu thing may sound like "cutting your losses", but criticism will always come, whether it is because you make certain changes or why not, or in this case because they hide the information.
It is sad that (Ubuntu) lend themselves to respond to people's opinions instead of focusing on what their goal is in conjunction with what their community seeks.
Surely the issue of lents shopping has been the trigger for this decision. Think about it carefully: when this feature was brought to light by the alpha 3 or beta 1, a downpour of criticism fell to Canonical, accusing them of violating the privacy of users. While it is true that canonical was not very tactful, it is also true that it was an alpha version at the time, and the criticisms should have been approached differently.
I think that the Ubuntu versions that are not LTS, should be treated more as development versions (although functional), and surely (all this is speculation) the ubuntu shopping lens is more oriented to the distro that goes in the smarts TVs that for PCs and laptops, and for sure, change a lot until the next LTS appears back in 2014
Those strong criticisms did Canonical a favor, for those criticisms they made the necessary changes so as not to violate European electronic privacy laws.
But, how do you know if Canonical did not have a plan in mind so that the user could deactivate these searches before the criticism fell? It was only an alpha version, when the brown fell, and the alphas do not have to have the finished product ...
How about community.
This decision by Cannonical should come as no surprise. It should be remembered that Cannonical is a company and as such bases its survival on the income that can be had from its products, as Novell does with SUSE or Red Hat for example.
As far as I do agree with Nano, it is that, from my personal point of view, it is a decision that discards the community and relegates it to being only Apps generators (curiously, something that Microsoft is also trying to implement with closed systems that It will be Windows 8 and in particular on the ARM platform), something that can also be uncomfortable from various perspectives (of course if they are a little badly thought like me). All the distros show their roadmap every time they announce the new development cycle, so affirming the opposite is not true, for a sample you just have to check the case of openSUSE, Fedora, Mageia, Mint, Debian, PClinuxOS, etc. . (to give a few examples) that make them available to the community (with the aplhas, betas and RC's) for debugging and observations that they make.
This I have already commented and I will repeat it again: Apple and its ecosystem is the one that dominates and determines the market trends for better or for worse. Microsoft, being relegated to the second position, is also trying to get out of its market share by imitating Apple.
If you have noticed, Google (understand Android) and Cannonical have been working together to try to make a kind of ecosystem similar to Apple and make it a counterweight. This is natural since both companies as such are financially focused and trying to get their slice of the cake. Whether it has a benefit or not for Linux and the community in general will be seen in time.
You also have to understand that the webOS of the Mozilla Foundation and HP are working with these operating systems, also thinking of being important players in mobile devices of any format.
Before you start tearing your clothes and beating your chest, you will have to give time, as I have already mentioned, and we will see what happens, in other words "You must not thorn yourself before putting on the huarache."
What should be noted and that is nothing invented by me or anyone, is that the contribution that Cannonical and the * buntu family have made (except for Kubuntu, which is sponsored by Blue Systems) is only to bring the environment closer in a more friendly way (something that almost all do in fact) to the common and current user.
Something that I do not want to miss is the fact that many distros are due to their communities since without these they would eventually disappear. A proof of what I say is that you can check the DistroWatch.com page (to name one) for the discontinued distributions and you will notice that there are as many or more than the active ones and this is a fact that in my opinion should be taken into account .
Although I am not entirely convinced that it is correct to hide part of the development (because it will not be all that is "hidden", but certain "news"), I do not think it is entirely bad. I agree with what is proposed, in that it may be a "press" move to generate greater expectations. To be honest, Google, Microsoft, Apple, RIM do it; and the expectation that is generated around it is enormous.
I do not agree with the interpretation that is given to the phrase that is quoted. I read Mark's note or post and I think it refers to criticism for its own sake. Without going any further, we know many who will always criticize what "Canoni $ oft" does, whether it is correct or not. Those "critics" don't care if you explain them and show them that they can be wrong, they only care about "criticizing", and many times leaving objectivity aside, losing the point that it is open source, that nobody puts a weapon in anyone's head to force anything and that - at least so far - no one pays for Ubuntu, except Shuttleworth.
As long as the "news" code remains open source, I am not at all interested in whether they comment on it or not, I am not entirely convinced, but I think it may be interesting to watch.
regards
Looking at it from the perspective that you propose, I agree with you and as I mentioned, you do not have to thorn yourself before putting on the huarache.
[OT] "you don't have to prick yourself before putting on the huarache"; this phrase if he didn't have it 😛 [/ OT]
But there are on both sides, those who will criticize Ubuntu for ever and ever, both the bad and the good, and those who would even justify Canonical turning Ubuntu into proprietary software, always with the alibi that how it is a company that seeks above all economic benefit as it would be "understandable and reasonable."
Then nobody criticize Apple.
"But there are both sides"
Exactly, it is so; but you have to differentiate things.
Specifically, I don't think "it's an alibi", it's a reality. Canonical is a one-pocket financed company; and we use their software for free believing we have the right to tell a company that finances development how to do things. In any case, we must sign up for those distributions developed by the community; Ubuntu is developed by a group of developers paid by a company structured as such that, like others like Red Hat, believe in the business based on open source, and this is not bad; from the beginning we know this. The day Canonical decides to close the Ubuntu code, it will have its right to do so, plus we have our right to change the distribution for one that continues to strive for the principles that we like.
Let's not be foolish either, many open source projects have succumbed due to lack of financial support; The recent Ubuntu Tweak comes to mind and I remember GIMP that almost almost succumbed.
We cannot pretend to tell Shuttleworth how to develop a distribution (which will be impossible to satisfy all of its users) while he puts up the money to conform. I think that he, as the head of the company, sets the guidelines to follow in the way that he thinks will allow him, at least, to recover all the money invested. Personally I think we are wrong if we think so; at least with respect to Canonical. There are many distros developed by the community, clearly Ubuntu is not among them, and it is not bad, as long as its code remains Open Source.
regards
Well, Mark already said it some time ago: "Ubuntu is not a democracy [ergo, my balls rule here]."
But if Mark's idea was to build a system with which to do business and make decisions outside his community of users, I think it would have been more correct if he had developed a proprietary system from scratch, or had done it for a fee, like Red Hat And if he hadn't sold us the idea of "Linux for Human Beings, Linux for All" from the beginning, of course it would always be easier to take advantage of community work until it was no longer useful to him.
Obviously it is not a democracy, there is a structure. Even those distributions "developed by the community" are hierarchically structured, where as a community we want the inclusion of one thing and those who have the final decision understand that another is better; let's not fool ourselves either. For example, GNOME and its crazy things are not demonized, because it is community friendly, but it is becoming more and more closed, with that blessed systemd that complicates everything, with design ideas that one knows where it comes from. Where the user community (and many developers) are crying out for a change, and change does not come and follow the follies imposed by the boss, a Red Hat employee.
I'm dying to see a distribution developed by the community, where the developer community must pay attention to the user community and thus conform to all of us.
I don't think it's wrong to do business based on open source, I respect your opinion, but I don't share it.
"" Linux for human beings, Linux for everyone "", sorry, but I think you are confused and quite. Ubuntu, is it difficult? Is it paid? Is it available to everyone? That's what you mean.
Another thing is that they are hermetic with certain features to include (if you read the article of the announcement, very different from this one, we do not need to delve into this), as it already happened and nobody said anything (Overlays Scrollbar, HUD, initial development of Unity, etc. .); the mere announcement does not change the thing, and Ubuntu will continue to be easy, surely free and surely open source, the day that it does not (because it can happen and they are in their right, after all it is their money) we can choose other solutions , or not.
The day it stops being free, at least for many, they go to hell.
Canonical knows that monetizing something that has been free for so long is going to get you absolutely nothing.
Regarding closing the code (read above), the truth is, it is not their right because it has too many add-ons released under free licenses and created by others, so what they can really close is Unity or Ubuntu One, things that they created; but shutting down Ubuntu is impossible, you can't shut down the Kernel unless you do everything from scratch.
I do not share the idea that Martin says, that because it is Shuttlerworth's Ubuntu, you cannot criticize its version of Linux, because if they are offering me a product and they recommend me to purchase and use it, I am fully entitled, as a user who I am, to mark the questions with which I do not agree, it does not matter if the product is offered to me for free or through a payment.
I am not saying that it is not criticized, but I am talking about criticism for its own sake. Of non-constructive criticism, which we know there is.
I think there is a point at which criticism goes from being objective and borders on absurd limits, just as there are very valid criticisms; for example, what I mentioned above about the Shop Lens, which gradually adapted to the criticism.
Greetings.
Well, given the title of this post, I started to read Mark's note and I think they didn't quite understand what he meant, the idea is that for things that have been developed internally by Canonical, trusted members of the community will be invited to that they can closely give their opinions on the matter or collaborate. They are the kind of things Canonical as a company develops and hopes to release at some point and is only announced when it's done.
I don't know if they remember when HUD came out, they just announced it when it was ready, or when they released Ubuntu for Android, that was another boom, and as such it was not discussed in the community openly. Those kinds of things are what Shuttleworth talks about, for which they will invite people from the community to help, and that when they come to light it is because they are ready. Canonical as a company needs to develop these R&D projects that allow it to get something big without other companies that produce similar products finding out like (Microsoft, Apple and others), so they would be the first.
The idea is not to be more secret, but more open to this kind of thing, this is one of Shuttleworth's comments:
I am proposing * less * secrecy, not more. We will invite community members in to discuss and consider and shape things that we would previously have done internally only. I trust you'll agree that's a good thing.
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1200#comment-397651
Guys misinterpreted the ad. Read well so as not to create false states of opinion.
Greetings.
“The idea is that for things that have been developed internally by Canonical, trusted members of the community will be invited so that they can closely give their opinions on the matter or collaborate. They are the kinds of things Canonical as a company develops and hopes to release at some point and is only announced when it's done. "
Thank you for bringing the timely clarification. 🙂
Hahaha, what a misinterpretation Mark was given, the thing is the other way around, in Fayer Wayer I have only seen in the comments a person who corrects the one who wrote that article:
http://www.fayerwayer.com/2012/10/el-siguiente-ubuntu-tendra-un-desarrollo-mas-secreto-para-evitar-las-criticas-antes-del-lanzamiento/
I don't know why they do that, it will be because of Mark's language, but it is the other way around, the idea is to open up more to the community certain developments that are carried out internally at Canonical.
Gentlemen cannot publish things lightly, you have to analyze the original source well.
I think those kinds of notes justify the phrase quoted here. Those who are critical will always be; without caring for the plain truth. Criticism for its own sake.
@nano (author of this article): Friend I recommend the following article from Shuttleworth in which he clarifies the thing:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1207
What I offered to do, yesterday, spontaneously, is to invite members of the community in to the things we are working on as personal projects, before we are ready to share them. This would mean that there was even less of Ubuntu that was NOT shaped and polished by folk other than Canonical - a move that one would think would be well received. This would make Canonical even more transparent.
What Mark is talking about is that members of the community will be invited to participate in things they work on as personal projects, as two comments above explained to you, things like HUD or Ubuntu for Android were from those projects developed internally and that were announced when they were presentable.
In this LTS cycle remember that Ubuntu should be released for mobiles and TVs, and God knows what other things they have in mind, as for HUD they want it to be complemented in the future with voice recognition, this must another of those projects in those who work very quietly, things like that. The idea is to open up more to these things that they have worked and work internally at Canonical.
Greetings.
Hopefully the author does read the note, unless he changes the title to one according to the circumstances.
I ask, is there a lot of fuss about the secret laboratory of Google, Apple, etc? Nerd?
I think that if there are criticisms, it is because we are right, and these people do not want to understand Ubuntu has been spreading it for a while.
The decision does not seem so bad to me, if it is very disrespectful for its users and developer community because they have already worked with them for a long time. Even so, I consider that if Canonical did not make decisions, we would still be using gnome2, mate or some old desktop and although some of us get used to these desktops, nowadays the trend goes to another type of GUI.
I imagine that specifically unity, the news and the market strategy is the only thing it will have in secret, on the other hand, in Canonical not only programmers and engineers work, there are all kinds of professionals. Little by little Ubuntu will become a more complete platform. Steam is coming and who knows what other things will come. The need for the approach they need in canonical seems clear to me. And in the end they will release the code. Android doesn't work like that? If anyone does not like these decisions, I think there is linux mint, like arch and debian. Greetings.
I do not think that they become an Owner, but that within a certain time it will appear for sale at about US $ 20 should not surprise anyone, it is more or less that the price of the Mountain Lion…. XD
The truth is that it is a company that is making decisions in favor of it ... many will feel betrayed and will find that it is the end of time ... but that is simply a business move whether we like it or not.
We are so badly accustomed to pointing out that when a product does not meet our needs then it is useless, forgetting that the same product meets the expectations of another user anywhere in the world.
I have never been an Ubuntu user, although it is installed on one of my home computers (my wife's), but I have to admit that this distribution does what it has to do, my wife is happy and we both agree in that it is the distro with the best aesthetic finish just installed and so far without any setbacks or headaches like those that the "elite" of users of other distributions for "advanced" users like.
Another thing is that most of the criticism that Canonical receives comes from users of other distributions who hate it to death.
Just wait ... and as they say in a comment above "Do not tear our clothes" ahead of time.
The question: is proprietary and paid software the same? The Ubuntu base, in terms of software components, means that it cannot be changed by licenses, therefore it will continue to be Open Source; The day may come when you have to pay to use it, because one day Uncle Mark may get fed up with putting in dollars; that day, what will we do?
You should reread the Shuttleworth blog.
This man does not say that Ubuntu is going to be developed in secret. It says that some features are going to be developed behind closed doors and will be released when they are ready. In addition, for these characteristics it will seek the collaboration of the most active members of the community. Understand by more assets those that more code and bugs have contributed and solved.
That's something I would do too. I go from listening to annoying people who have nothing to do but criticize without contributing anything. So, I develop the product to my ball together with the developers of the community who want to sign up and when it is ready then I publish it and then they criticize if they want, it will be more useful to criticize at that time than to hinder the development continuously.
Exactly, the author of the entry should also read; after all, he is writing about an ad that is far from what he wants us to think. Sorry you still haven't fixed your mistake.
In my opinion, a good criticism makes us better in any aspect and if Ubuntu leaves that reason for which it started I think that more and more users will move away, well in my case, thank goodness I'm on my beloved Kubuntu 12.04
regards
I can also come to understand that many times people exaggerate what they say and create bad expectations about Canonical, everything they have talked about Unity, for example, but come on, it does not seem appropriate to keep everything related to own development behind the door.
Curious now the slogan of the official page of ubuntu:
"Your wish is our command."
Which goes to say: your wishes are orders (more or less).
ottia !!! Have you deleted my comment?
I remove this blog crap from my google reader
Delete it if you want, your comment was obviously spam and to troll, why put it? That is how simple things are.
I have read the comment you have made:
Sorry, but this comment does not add logic to the debate, you just want to offend. We are not a site that approves comments that for no apparent reason want to offend or demean a user.
Questions, complaints or suggestions to my email: kzkggaara[ARROBA]desdelinux[POINT]net
Nor does it add much logic to the debate to do so based on a story that is different from the announcement made by Mark Shuttleworth; not to defend it, but things as they are.
If we read the more than 1500 comments, we have very few who have read such an announcement, even who have read the comments to get out of the error that, surely involuntarily, the article entails.
regards
The point is that the comment was obviously troll, therefore, it was not going to appear in this or in another post.
Time, time is what it takes to read, not just Mark's full article but the comments. It's not to hell, but I can't get a masterful article on this either, not without spending at least three or 4 days reading in pieces as much as possible. And that's what I'm going to do, and I'll do another article, and I'm equally convinced that I'm not going to like the idea anymore ... not because it's Ubuntu because I already said it, I like the distro, but because I simply don't like that idea Not at all.
Ubuntu 13.04 Top Secret Edition.
The truth is that I have already commented on this topic in so many places that when I got here I have no idea what to say: - /
But the saying already said ... if you want to be in the limelight, let them talk about you, even for the worse, but let them talk.
Greetings from my Ubuntu Quantal that I am testing it.
First, I am surprised by the number of Ubuntu users…. Second, the loss of Ubuntu users is more than evident, for various reasons, but if it is as it is said in this news (I mean people who have read the original and say that it is not like that at all) Ubuntu will continue to lose users so nothing, Canonical will know what it does.
Wouldn't it be easier to read the original ad and realize that what is wrong is this news? You would be surprised to know that Ubuntu has gained more users than it "lost." Ubuntu aims to attract more users instead of staying as is; criticizable or not, but they are doing it and much better than you think.
Greetings.
My opinion regarding that man, makes me not waste a second with what he thinks or with what he sends, for that I read these websites that they read it for me and they make me a summary. Nor am I going to start discussing whether or not it grows, we would enter an absurd loop of Talibanism, I rely on certain websites and info and you on yours, I suppose 🙂
I agree. I am surprised by the number of users here using Ubuntu or its derivatives and speaking ill of it (although you didn't mean that). And I also agree that Ubuntu has lost users… it has lost "old" or "advanced" users but continues to grow with new users. After that keeps happening and computer manufacturers adopt it on their machines (like Dell, System76 and Asus, who now have an option to buy their PC's with Ubuntu instead of Windows) Ubuntu will continue to grow, whoever likes it. Ubuntu is centralized in making "life easier for the user" and this is something they have achieved with Unity, because in Dash, by typing the beginning of a word, you already have your search there with applications, documents, etc. The end user who is looking for a Laptop to enter YouTube, watch porn and have personal documents is easily satisfied with moderate security; so Ubuntu is a good alternative for that user. I understand the comments of the community and the disappointment of some, but unfortunately Ubuntu has taken a path that is not aimed at this "advanced" community in the GNU / Linux world but at the average user; We will not like Unity very much but it is useless to hold ourselves in our mind that it is a much easier environment to use because we lie to others and to ourselves. For the record, I am not defending Ubuntu or its decisions, I am saying what a regular user might think when looking for a PC. The truth.
«Because in the Dash with writing the beginning of a word you already have your search there with applications, documents, etc. »
* COF * MacOS has had this infinitely more refined functionality for several years now and is called Spotlight; in Windows they officially added it from Vista (although there were addons for XP long before) and in KDE SC there is a plasmoid called Run Command that does that and more ...
Dash has other more interesting functions such as access to menus, previews, lenses, etc., although they will have to refactor it to another language because in Python it is unusable because of how slow it is.
The slowness of Unity is directly due to Python, which while I love that programming language, it is not meant to be the basis for a backend in a desktop environment.
If you want ease of programming, you can program in C ++ and allow you to use python with Unity libraries or even create a mini framework ... But everyone with what they want and like.
you have to learn English….
Your comment is great haha 🙂
«While we won't talk about them until we think they are ready to celebrate, we're happy to engage with contributing community members that have established credibility (membership, or close to it) in Ubuntu, who want to be part of the action. "
-Mark Shuttleworth
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1200
«Ubuntu set the standard for transparency as a company producing a distribution a long time ago, when we invited anybody who showed a passion and competence to have commit and upload rights, a strong contrast with the Fedora policy of the time, which required you to be a Red Hat employee. "
-Mark Shuttleworth
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1207
Wow… I never make this type of comment because I don't like it, but I believe in honesty and in looking for real sources or original sources before saying any opinion.
The idea is not entirely unreasonable if we think that Ubuntu today intends to fight against the colossi of the industry on all the platforms that exist!
From what MS says in his blog and some interviews, making the development of new Ubuntu features private corresponds to three specific situations:
1. suddenly appear with new features that amaze users of all platforms and systems. ops. (and therefore safeguarding ideas closely linked to the growth and survival of the company, preventing competition from taking hold of them and taking away their "game changer" factor)
2. avoid the endless discussions that occur in distros like Debian where consensus is reached after arduous discussions making distro development too slow - almost said that Debian devs are Ents, hahahaha
3. Avoid all the fuzz and hype of the "early detractors" since, although later they realize that things are not as they believed, having to live with lots of negative comments - unfounded and erroneous - makes you lose the focus on the development of the distro.
I ask: in the end, Jobs was right?