Yesterday I came across a very interesting article on fossforce qualified Would It Be a Disaster If Ubuntu Ceased to Exist? That left me wondering ... what was Ubuntu's contribution to the "Linux world"? What would Linux be without Ubuntu?
Ubuntu: the good, the bad and the ugly
Lately, there are many failures and bad decisions by Canonical: Unity, Mir, its union with Amazon, Ubuntu for TVs, Ubuntu Edge, etc. These bad decisions, in addition, have caused a large part of Ubuntu users to abandon this distro and dare to try other flavors of Linux. In that sense, the failure of Ubuntu has been good for the rest of the Linux distributions, which have seen their user base grow. Perhaps the most "damaging" aspect of these bad decisions is that it has divided a large part of the users: Unity vs. Gnome, Mir vs Wayland, etc. What's more, both Unity and Mir are largely "lonely" Canonical developments with little to no community involvement.
However, Ubuntu still has very positive aspects. It has managed to make a name for itself outside the Linux world, which is no small thing. It has possibly the best installer, a huge number of packages available, a great community, good forums, a huge user base, it is conquering a growing percentage of the server market and has managed to become the benchmark when it comes to Linux gaming. (Steam, for example). Canonical is undoubtedly an innovative and forward-thinking company, even if some of its ideas have failed. But what if this string of failures leads Mark Shuttleworth to no longer fund Ubuntu development?
I'm your father
Ubuntu is also the base of a lot of distributions. A cursory analysis of the 50 most popular distributions yields the following Ubuntu derivatives: Mint, OS4, Zorin, Lubuntu, Bodhi, Elementary, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Pear, Linux Lite, Ubuntu GNOME, Snowlinux, Peppermint, PinguyOS, BackBox and Ubuntu Studio . Which leads us to wonder: what if Canonical stops putting money into Ubuntu? The answer they give us at Fossforce is the following:
Linux has existed long before Ubuntu and will continue to exist long after Ubuntu. In the worst case, each of the Ubuntu-based distributions could be downgraded to Debian without major problems.
Ironically, I would add that maybe this is better for Ubuntu. This would pass into the hands of the community, as has happened with other free software projects, and would possibly experience a "greening" very much in the LibreOffice style. If not, there is no doubt that another distro will fill the gap left by Ubuntu very quickly.
Why the question?
Honestly, I think Canonical is unlikely to decide to ditch Ubuntu, at least not yet. Through different agreements, Canonical has managed to turn Ubuntu into a profitable product. Let's just think about the agreement with the Chinese government or the agreements with some computer manufacturers to distribute their devices with Ubuntu pre-installed. It may not be profitable enough for Mark Shuttleworth to become the next Steve Jobs - perhaps his hidden dream? - but it is profitable enough for the company not to lose.
So why wonder what would Linux be without Ubuntu? In short, because it seems to me that it is a healthy question. The importance of Ubuntu in Linux has often been exaggerated. There are a ton of other desktop distros available that are either as good as Ubuntu or MUCH better in various ways. So Linux could not only survive the eventual loss of Ubuntu, it would continue to prosper. Ubuntu has certainly helped promote the desktop use of Linux, but it has grown far beyond any reliance on a distribution to survive.
You. what do you think?
I use ubuntu but as I all say I am not happy with its latest distro, it is very unstable, the problems with wireless network adapters are repeated the same with the previous one and a lot of "kernel panic". But what leads me to continue in Ubuntu is that I start with 12.04 and as well as many basic users I am grateful. Besides that it's all about free will …… right? We are free for our heads to ache with whatever we want, otherwise we would not be free
Curious that you mention it, I have never had problems with the Hardware, I have installed ubuntu dozens of times on many PCs with all kinds of hardware, 10 years ago, 5 years ago, 1 years a few months, and everything is perfect.
What weighs on me the most about Ubuntu is that it integrates with Amazon, for example, in Ubuntu I feel like a "Windows desired" Linux.
Greetings.
Ubuntu started thousands and thousands of Users in Linux [I include myself although now I use manjaro].
It is true, its errors have been blundering, for example today, when using Ubuntu I don't feel comfortable, I feel like I am on a Linux that has been "Windowsado".
However, I do not totally agree that users could fill the gap that Ubuntu left so easily, many, like Windows users are already married to the system for many reasons, as you well mentioned, the number of packages, the simplicity of the installer, the thousands of tutorials that exist for Ubuntu, the support, etc ... For example, what I recognize is that with no other Distro there is as much compatibility with the Hardware as with Ubuntu, in all the distributions that I have used I have always had I have to do some fixes so that my hardware works at% 100, not like that in Ubuntu.
Ubuntu is no longer the best Linux distribution [by the way, I don't think there is a winner, many are debating the position] but without a doubt, Ubuntu is Ubuntu and no one will ever be able to fill the gap perfectly.
A very interesting article, makes you comment, greetings.
Good
Ubuntu is the shuttle distro that allowed many of us to enter the world of GNU / Linux. Its installation comfort, its ease of use, its stability, allowed many inexperienced users to enter and learn how everything works. But there are also many of us who end up unhappy for one reason or another, and we end up moving to other distros.
If Ubuntu disappears ... I don't think there would be any problem for the GNU / Linux world.
New convenient distros have emerged, such as GNU / Linux Mint, and Ubuntu does not really have the upper hand in the development of Linux, rather they go their way, taking the opposite of the direction set by the community, investigating things that in the end they are not interested more than them.
I started with Mandrake 9 and continued with Debian.
To be honest, Mint would be the perfect replacement for Ubuntu, so its loss is not going to be felt at all.
After all, Ubuntu could become a fully community-based project and improve if Shuttleworth stopped pumping capital and didn't "put it right under his nose" (although it did make it more popular than Debian at first).
Mint replacement of Ubuntu ... and how would you do to have a base system if you do not develop one, and the Debian Edition has it increasingly abandoned?
Maybe now they don't care about Debian, but as soon as Ubuntu is abandoned, only the Debian version would have a real support.
Mint Ubuntu replacement? And I thought that Mint was a slightly modified Ubuntu and nothing more hehe
I don't think you mean to say that Mint will take over the entire Canonical role of maintaining packages.
GNU / Linux is a great universe, Canonical is a key piece in the development of this universe, however the development of Ubuntu in recent years has been involved in endless problems with its community, coupled with the intrinsic problems of the GNU / Linux world on the desktop.
On the one hand, it has moved away from the community, not only by restricting access to the development of its software, but also by ignoring its recommendations and needs (that no one told Canonical that the client always loses his mind, but from time to time once you have to pay attention to what the majority of the market segment thinks).
The worst mistake of Ubuntu is that it has forgotten its origin "GNU / Linux" and especially its development model, Canonical develops segregated and decentralized applications from the backbone, which is, its community. These applications completely break the development ecosystem, generating a model that is more similar to proprietary software than free software (cf. The cathedral and the bazaar: Eric S. Raymond). This development focused only and exclusively on canonical, brings with it all the stability problems that in recent years are increasing.
The bazaar model does not work if the feedback is broken, even more so without those thousands of programmers who work for free and who imply millions of dollars in salaries and man-hours for the development of a project. The specific case is that of Google with Android, which applies the bazaar model for the kernel and a large part of the software (providing Linux with this valuable code that is remunerated in a reciprocal cycle cycle) and combines the cathedral model in the design of applications and brand management. The cathedral model, as in the case of Microsoft, only works if you have the millions of dollars that this process entails, which Ubuntu does not have.
In addition to the terrible communication policy in which "Mark Shuttleworth" (who is not a friendly and convincing face, an image designer is urgently needed) appears in commercials (of an Apple-like design style) trying to position Ubuntu in a market that already It is crowded, which is the mobile phone, and diverting resources from the desktop to the mobile, which is clearly a combination for disaster.
In conclusion Ubuntu must improve communication management, not waste time developing personalized, segregated and infunctional software, but support the one that already exists and has communities that pay for it, spend resources on a serious face lift (designers, communicators, engineers ). And finally attract and merge more communities, something like what razor qt and lxde qt did, not only with GNU / Linux communities but with companies, something that gave Ubuntu its status at the time is that it was not just another option, « IT WAS THE CHOICE "so there were not so many segregated communities that develop such disparate software, the world was focused on a single software and that was the key to its success.
I also started with mandrake haya in 2002, now I am back with the distribution that has made me happy Arch greetings
At the moment I am using debian on the desktop at home, but for the laptop I have always preferred Ubuntu lts. Today it is the most stable version of Ubuntu with a copend of drivers and ideal software with a play to play philosophy. The reality is that its stability of ubutu lts is good, I hope it updates to version 14.04, but the stability of debian is insurmountable, however I have never liked this slow development, almost 2 or 3 years to develop a distribution . I would particularly like you to make a cookie for the development of design applications, Gimp, scribus, inkscape, wings3d, blender, cinelerra, etc. they are good but poor compared to their competition. as an example what google did (https://www.google.com/webdesigner/)
At some point I thought that if they should put the batteries and increase the external investment for their development team, they could position themselves as the best GNU / Linux distribution on the desktop, (of course their development process is focused on quality and it does not matter much time it takes to reach that quality, a philosophy that gives stability but leaves aside competing in market segments like the desktop) and that is why Ubuntu, mint, solun os and others occupy that place. However, a few days ago I did a complete reinstallation on my desktop although there is a significant advance, I disapprove of the graphical installer that is not even close to Ubuntu (I ended up using console mode), I love that it is free software but it is impossible to make it work My network card without private drivers (although it is the only drier that I need in this update and that is to be applauded), I do not think that the absence of plymount makes it look professional especially on the desktop, it takes a good training designer (and not engineers and novices trying to design) as the front and back is generally horrible throughout the project.
In short, debian does not aim to be a distribution for the desktop, if it were proposed bye, bye Ubuntu, mint, voyager, trisquel, solun os, neutriler, goodbye to all derivatives.
I started using Mandrake 9 after I was getting tired of using Windows for everything in school assignments, I wanted to try something different.
I started with Mandrake because I had bought a magazine with the distributions of that moment and Red Hat seemed too complex to me just in the installation and maintenance of packages and without knowing almost anything about GNU / Linux because I gave up using it.
Later I read about Debian, Ubuntu Kubuntu and everything seemed wonderful to me with "that of" GNOME and KDE, I fell in love with KDE at first, but little by little I suffered from visual errors and "crashes" of some applications, so I looked at the minimalist with GNOME and fell in love little by little and compared to KDE I had very little discomfort.
Later, the change from Mandrake to Mandriva took me out of the game, because I stopped liking it and I switched to SUSE for its very polished environment and similar to my Windows that I was already leaving until Ubuntu reappeared with greater force and with a sin End of news and internet presence, so I gave it an opportunity in its version 8 if I remember correctly and I loved its simplicity and its great support that I was beginning to find in forums. The downside of this story is that I started working and the companies where I had been were married to the Microsoft firm and I had to use Windows again on my personal computer. Until a couple of months ago I changed companies and they gave me the freedom to use whatever system I wanted, because the development would be web, with a few small developments in Visual Studio, but for this case I only emulate with VirtualBox, and it was that I tried Linux Mint 15, Ubuntu 12.0 and Debian 7.2 and, the one I liked the most personally was Debian, it has everything I need and after my comparison it is the fastest of the 3.
I think there are flavors of GNU / Linux for everyone, it is just a matter of taking a little time to try them for the final decision as it was my turn.
And we must give credit to other distributions that have given power to GNU / Linux, since without them many of us would not be in this world full of wonders; but it should be noted that Ubuntu had or still has a great power of impact on new users who want to enter the "free world".
Greetings.
I have nothing against mint, but it is highly overrated. the truth is ubuntu with a different desktop.
You describe how ubuntu was until 2010-2011, a debian with updated packages and easy installation. Ahh! and it sent you a free installation CD
Hey Hey hey!!!
Don't forget that they set the codecs by default and save us the tremendous effort of installing "ubuntu-restricted-extras", eh !! u_u
For someone new that can be an odyssey.
I want to see you maintain a desktop and create new libraries for the interface, create a file manager like NEMO, etc.
Adapt programs for your new desktop.
All that work is not easy. Are you talking about more
You say anything. Better educate yourself and inform yourself well.
Because writing a new desktop and maintaining it is not easy.
I want to see you maintain a desktop and create new libraries for the interface, create a file manager like NEMO, etc.
Adapt programs for your new desktop.
All that work is not easy. Are you talking about more
Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu because it uses its package repositories.
"Why rewriting a desktop and maintaining it is not easy at all"
they didn't write any new desktop, cinnamon is nothing more than gnome shell with some plugins. they didn't write anything from scratch
»Create new libraries for the interface, create a file manager like NEMO»
again more of the same, they did not create anything, nemo is a nautilus with the name changed and some adjustments in the appearance.
and for your information they did not create any library they just change the names to gnome
You say anything. Better educate yourself and find out well »» You're talking about more »
The one that I speak of more is you, better inform yourself well and educate yourself well.
I have nothing against mint, I even have it installed on a pc. but you have to be honest and admit the reality, mint is ubuntu with a different appearance.
Did you take a look at the Mint project codes and compare them to GNOME?
It is programmed in Gtk, Vala, Javascript (Gtk), Python.
Well, I did see the code of both projects and compare them.
Nemo's PATHABAR has nothing to do with Nautilus 3.6.
CINNAMON also has nothing to do with the Gnome Shell in many of its files.
Modifying to suit your needs sometimes means rewriting a file.
I want you to show me the simple changes that MINT makes to the GNOME code is what you say?
I hope you know programming? . Because talking is free.
I clarify that I am not arrogant. But sometimes I see MOUTHS that speak without foundation.
https://github.com/linuxmint
You seem a little resentful.
To tell the truth, Ubuntu is a distro that, on the one hand, has put the existence of Linux on everyone's lips, so it could be said that it has contributed to calling more ordinary people to be able to leave (in part), of the Windows dependency. On the other hand, it did not achieve that both GNU / Linux users and ordinary users can coexist harmoniously, so many turn to Windows / OSX and the truth is that these speeches are quite annoying.
In my personal opinion, I do not use Ubuntu simply because of the poor implementation of Amazon spyware (even Apple and the NSA know how to make spyware that does not interfere with processes), and because of how slow it is to handle ".deb" packages. Hence, the reason why I have stayed in Debian and it has not disappointed me at all, although I have planned that for 2014, I will migrate to Arch as soon as I buy my wireless network card.
In short, Ubuntu has managed to be considered an alternative for those who barely knew Windows and OSX.
But for something to be considered a spy it has to be done behind your back, right?
I think the biggest achievement ubuntu made was to make Debian stop being an advanced distro to become an intermediate distro.
That is the idea that was had from the beginning! Although for KISSers, Debian was "better" before Ubuntu. Anyway, I liked Debian because of how robust it is compared to Ubuntu.
Excellent post.
What would Ubuntu be without Debian?
A forgettable distro.
that is the real question friend without debian there are no ubuntu or derivatives and the vast majority of .deb derive from the rock debian do not detract from the father the son of good publicity and made the gnu / linux world known but had many errors and stumbles favorably there are many distros similar and better than ubuntu that derive from rock should enjoy their stable versions testing and sid for my opinion server user desktop and beta
+1
True, very true mate. We have the example of Cruchbang. It is Tremenda Distros its simplicity, stability and functionality is something I love. I love the Openbox desktop.!: P
hello, well ubuntu has been an important part for the general public because it is the basis that at least some people take to get to know the world of Linux. I use ubuntu and the truth is if it lacks many things in the end one ends up or returning to Windows or trying another better distro, there are better distros than ubuntu, so in my opinion if ubuntu disappears nothing would happen in the Linux world unlike people could be the opportunity to meet other distros.
We go by parts as I would say "jack the ripper"
1 - What ubuntu did VERY WELL, which no other distro does, is the MARKETING issue. Thanks to that he became very well known ... that is, you ask anyone who does not belong to the linux world well, and the safest thing is to name you Ubuntu. Besides that, it achieved its own identity and brand.
2 - It seems to me that Mark got on a horse and wanted to cover a lot, he wanted to make ubuntu for tvs, for cell phones, etc etc, when Ubuntu for desktop is not yet a 100% solid and finished platform.
3 - If he lives or dies, nothing affects the linux world. As they say there is a before ubuntu, and ubuntu was based on debian ... it was not something made from scratch. So if he dies nothing happens.
Anibal: I fully agree with your comment.
Hug! Paul.
Well, everything would remain the same, we would continue to have the same users around the world in another distro. I remember very well, that Ubuntu 9.04, is not that it was a big deal compared to other distros. Before we were 1% in base 100, and now we are 1% in base 1000, much would not change.
What would Linux be without Ubuntu?…. Utopia?
The header hater was not missing xD
1) I'm going to be totally honest, the truth is, it seems to me that they hit Ubuntu, because giving an opinion is free, I am an Archlinux user, although I usually hang around several distros, beyond that ubuntu sends shit, those who are shitting Ubuntu is the same Linux community, Ubuntu is opensource, the code is there, whoever wants to port something, do it, it touches me to be reproached for not doing this or not doing that, I'll be clearer, They hit him for Unity, for Mir (although in the latter I am more in favor of Wayland) but for example no one insulted Opensuse for YAST (I say they insult Ubuntu for unity that outside of Ubuntu it does not work ..) then everyone is happy with Systemd ... no one shouted to the sky .. I remind you that Systemd goes through the balls all the BSDs that are not compatible with it .. nobody said anything, Chakra has the Dharma theme, exclusive to Chakra, nobody said anything ... this is the first flaw, as ubuntu is the fashionable one, which is trying to stacar, we all hit him.
2) Ubuntu is not stable ubuntu breaks, "ubuntos, they are lammers, it is a loaded system etc etc etc", those who say that ubuntu is not stable, when they do a sudo apt-get update it takes half an hour to load the 4 million of PPAs that they added, OBVIOUS brother that it will not be stable if you put PPA for everything, it is more they should give thanks that with the animaladas that they do to the system through PPA, the thing continues working, it seems to me a total ass
3) this one is hooked with the previous one on that it consumes resources ... of unity in particular I don't know why I haven't used Debian-based ones for a long time, but I've seen there, screenshots that show how much RAM with for example XFCE or GNOME or KDE or LXDE they eat X distros at boot time (apparently this is what people who say ubuntu is heavy are based on), I'll be frank, don't be stupid, it's clear that if xubuntu by default raises 6472 services and manjaro 3, Manjaro is going to consume "less", at this point I take the opportunity to hit those who say that about KDE, every so often I have to bring up the screenshot of a KDE that I myself played with the preferences to take it if I remember correctly 182 mb of RAM at the beginning, some will tell me a but you took everything you disabled all the services, to which I will respond, does LXDE for example bring all the services that I disable in KDE? The answer is NO, all things being equal, KDE consumes very little, the thing that swallows up the RAM the most is the plasma desktop itself, about 64 MB of RAM, so please refrain from commenting on how a distro comes by default, Because the only thing they do is provide wrong information, for example Chakra (64 bits) if I remember correctly it consumes almost 1 GB at the beginning because it has activated absolutely all the "features" of KDE, does this mean that ALL KDEs consume 1 GB? please….
4) Continuing with the consumption of RAM, the RAM is to BE USED, looking for things on disk IS SLOWER MUCH SLOWER http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Jerarquia_memoria.png IT IS NOT BAD THAT THEY CONSUME RAM, it is clear that it is not good for them to waste it either, for example my personal KDE in which I activate absolutely everything, with an open browser, it is usually around 1,7 GB, more than one when reading this is due to be throwing out the window, and when I demand it with a lot of open programs I usually step on the 3 GB, now this is where some say but I prefer to allocate ram to useful things because in what I do I use it a lot, perfect, it seems to me a totally reason valid to install an environment that really consumes little, in my case occasionally I play with rainbow tables, where the more I can load in RAM the better, as I do occasionally, I have a partition with Kali Linux (in this use the tables) in which I handle a light environment, since to speed up the process, the more tables I can load in RAM the better, I repeat how I do it occasionally that's why I keep a partition for this, 99% of the time I am on my main system under KDE, so why damn I want an openbox that consumes 100 mb and is extremely austere?
5) picking up a bit because I went around the bush, all this curiously reminds me of Apple and its fingerprint system, I remember a long time ago that HP notebooks brought that system, and going back to point 1, NO ONE said anything
6) speaking of the overloaded ubuntu, this I do not deny, but it does not seem bad given the target that has an OS like Ubuntu, the stupidity is to say that for example Arch is faster because you put what you want, HELLO Ubuntu Alternate Installer or alternate CD or minimal CD or whatever the hell it's called, the idea behind that little known CD is a very similar idea to Arch's, by default it gives you a console and you install everything, initially the packages of ubuntu were compiled for i486 if I remember correctly and arch for i686, here if we could talk about an advantage of Arch with respect to ubuntu, but if I remember correctly Ubuntu from 8.X or 9.X began to compile in i686 so let's not be assholes ¬¬
7) Conclusion, they hit you for hitting you, beware there are very valid reasons, Mir for example, Amazon.
What does not listen to the community is very subjective, what project does it do? I am going to be more blunt, how many patches does Torvalds reject per day ?, in which case, Torvalds does not listen to the community? It is wrong that Ubuntu wants have control over all parts of your OS ?, and that is why you spend it forking ?, ARE THE RULES OF THE GAME, and as a COMPANY IT IS NOT WELL SEEN THAT IT DEPENDS ON A PROJECT THAT IS MAINTAINED BY THE COMMUNITY, however, from my point of view would be much more ethical ?, sensible ?, directly to sponsor a community project, that way they will listen to your requests, you will support the project, and you will respect certain decisions that the original creator of the project makes
Excellent points! I think largely like you. We hit Ubuntu because we have to hit someone, it seems. It has been a big step to migrate (convince) Windows users to move to Linux. And do not say that other distros too, because it is true for someone like us who dares to fiddle, but an office user does not convince him just like that. I have changed Windows to Linux in several places and I think that if it had not been for Ubuntu, the adaptation would have been very difficult.
Conclusion, let's not hit him for hitting, it has been in my opinion beneficial to insert himself into the world of the common user
Brace yourself! The flame is coming! D:
PS: son of your mother, write in shorter paragraphs next time, my head hurts now because of you
mega billet xD, I couldn't finish it.
great friend!
+10 ubuntu cares about making itself known something that other distros do not, although elementaryOS is already beginning to take its steps and want to stand out, excellent points
Regarding systemd say that there were actually many who raised the cry in the sky. What happens is that this was a discussion that did not transcend the end user. Also systemd not only forgets about * BSD; there are components around that system that replace essential unix services and that depend on systemd. I mean a lot of midleware is being created that forces systemd to boot; a clear example is logind, Gnome> = 3.8 has it as a strong dependency (not optional) for handling power saving, being that logind only works if the boot was done by systemd. Therefore, unless Debian / Ubuntu / Gentoo and the * BSDs are looking for a workaround, they will not be able to install Gnome-Power without switching to systemd, which is no small thing.
Effectively. I was a Gentoo user 1-2 years and then 1 year of Funtoo. I should clarify that with no one I referred to the common of users who do not see beyond the yellow information hovering around there. In the Gentoo forums the discussions on this topic are usually very hot as with any other package, the last I remember was that in the latest version of Chromium (at the time I think it was 21 or something like that) they added a dependency that It has little to do with it, so they screwed a bit about that xD
First, many criticisms made of Ubuntu are valid, for example Mir is very criticizable. And by systemd there were great discussions.
I hardly complain about how slow it is to process .deb packages and only because of the poor installation of Amazon spyware. Of the rest, I have no complaints.
I hardly ever use Debian out of habit, and I still respect it. What. They should improve are its users and those who have not really tried the distro without even having used it in TTY mode.
Undoubtedly something that is recognized in this distro is its great work around the end user
If not because I read this same entry in muycomputer I would tell you that it is a good question
Ubuntu for me was the first distro that I used and it introduced me to the linux world where I can't get out, I still use this distro because I like it and besides that it is always updated and the great support that our canonical friends give it but There is only one thing that I do not like and I would like you to take it into account and that is that ubuntu is not being updated every 6 months but that it is a ranking version of linux like arch
Undoubtedly, although today Ubuntu is a kind of alien, individualistic and unpleasant structure (for many, but not for all), I think that its greatest contribution is located towards its birth and first years of development, in which it was the first serious initiatives that sought to bring Linux to the average user, and they achieved it with such overwhelming success that I read that a figure of almost 90% of people who started using Linux without previous advanced computer knowledge, did so via Ubuntu.
Although it is possible that if Canonical had not done this, someone else would have done it, in this universe that has to thank for this contribution, it is Canonical with its Ubuntu "Linux for Human Beings".
I also think that a lot of the criticism they have made is not really towards its worst aspects. Unity and Mir, although they are not for everyone, there are people who find them attractive and if genres are broken in tastes I think that diversity is one of the advantages of GNU / Linux. For me the real problem lies in a marketing and semi-spy trend that Caonical has adopted to keep track of users, that if they do not take the time to investigate, they will not know, that for example, the searches carried out in Unity are analyzed by Canonical in much the same way as Google does.
I am one of those who does not understand the fuss of Ubuntu. Neither for better nor for worse do I understand why everyone hates him or why everyone loves him. He has dared many things that others have not, I see that well; but the truth is I don't like it and that's why I don't use it or throw shit at it. That easy.
I agree. That is the spirit that should reign in the Linux community (not only regarding Ubuntu)
Haha, how funny the photo, why is the penguin afraid of the Ubuntu logo?
It was pure chance… it is the photo we had in our library. 🙂
It is true that Ubuntu brought many to the gnu / linux world, I started with Ubuntu but then I stopped liking it so every 6 months I had to update the system and I could not get used to using unity, now I am in arch I do not know how but there I am 🙂
regards
In a few months, you won't even remember how things were done in Ubuntu. 🙂
At least that's what happened to me when I started using Manjaro.
Cheers! Paul.
The derivatives of Ubuntu are the ones that fully justify its continued existence, because they correct Suttleworth's stupidity and bring them closer to the community. In addition, Ubuntu has the strange merit of making Debian wake up, be more usable, and update more often. As an Arch and Ubuntu Studio user on the same machine, it is always preferable to have stability when streaming audio than venturing too far into the bledding edge alone. That's what Linux is for: so that we can freely use what helps and best suits us.
Well, what can I tell you? Ubuntu is the base of many very good distros and I don't think it can easily be replaced
Very good post!
The truth is that we like it or not is that Ubuntu is the first impression that normal people get from GNU / Linux. The fact that the most curious then go to other corners is something that we could consider timely.
In college, there was a point where many had to use Linux since it is used quite a bit in science. Well, except for those of us who already used it before, the rest got Ubuntu (even with Unity!). And to this day they use it. As in scientific research institutes, etc.
What I come to say is that Ubuntu, despite the latest unfortunate decisions of Canonical (in my opinion wanting to become Apple), is what its slogan says: Linux for human beings. No more no less. And I think that the fact that Canonical wants to cover TV, smartphones, tablets, etc. can only be good for the world of GNU / Linux (except perhaps Mir's last shit), since out of every 100 that start in Ubuntu, there will be 1 or 2 to move to other distros. Thus enriching GNU / Linux.
So to the question of what would Linux be without Ubuntu? Well ... maybe a massive migration of users to Fedora, OpenSuse, Manjaro, and other distributions that could offer a user experience like Ubuntu. What is clear is that it would be closing a very large door to the world of GNU / Linux.
A greeting!
Most of us got to Linux thanks to Ubuntu, I switched to Linux Mint because I didn't like Unity. I think that if they go back to the classic gnome it would have more acceptance for beginners ... Linux mint is gaining ground. Although some do not like the operating system it has to basically look like Windows because if beginners are not encouraged to enter.
What would Linux be without ubuntu? same. You can try Linux Mint based on debian (LMDE) it works perfect.
The truth, even in the use of software, one has to learn to coexist and be more tolerant with others and not to discriminate.
That if I use mint, that if you use arch, that if that one uses ubuntu, etc. In the end, I would say that the three of us use a linux with different tools and different personality (our personality).
The thing is that we want to find something to criticize positively or negatively, depending on the case.
So if Ubuntu disappeared, nothing would happen in the Linux ecosystem ... I see a lot of illusions around here ...
I also think that it would survive, although I do not think that Ubuntu will fall in 2 years, I think that it can grow rather (it has a lot of margin), right now Ubuntu is already present on many servers and desktops, recently they announced that they were leaving in China to sell a gazillion computers with Ubuntu, countries, municipalities, etc. are migrating to Linux, many for price, others for security and control of their systems ... I think Linux is going to grow a lot.
If Ubuntu keeps doing things right it will be there for a while.
What nonsense post, really ...
In that case, before saying something that from my point of view is a lack of respect for the author's work and time, I invite you to create one that complies with what you consider a good post.
I do not understand comments of this style in a blog where the only thing that you are asked to create your own post is that you register. If you don't like what there is, create the content that you consider appropriate.
Or at the very least, if you're going to get your hands dirty using the keyboard, write a comment that provides, at the very least, something constructive that can serve the author or users. I invite you to think about what feeling your comment will produce for the author and if you would like a comment like this on something that you have created to share with certain people.
Let's see, I don't want to offend or demean anyone, but the topic of the post is silly that you want me to tell you. Come on, I'm going to make the following post to see what you think: «What would happen to Linux and Ubuntu if tomorrow a meteorite fell on Earth? What if the price of oil went up? What if it was discovered that Peter Parker is not Spiderman but a clone of another clone of Mars?
you think ? So we play at being fortune tellers, and incidentally, a luxurious flame is created, which is the only thing the post intends.
It is not playing fortune tellers. As is raised in technology blogs, the possible sale of BlackBerry can pose the fall of Canonical, a company that has not been profitable nor does it seem that in the short term it will be. And it has not been for 9 years: http://www.muycomputerpro.com/2013/02/23/ubuntu-todavia-no-es-rentable/ . But in this blog as economics issues are not discussed, they talk about the possible disappearance or at least the end of Canonical behind Ubuntu. Nothing more, nothing less.
The fact that the last decisions focused on giving a benefit to the company have not gone as expected gives to consider that perhaps the company in the near future could be very battered.
I think the subject is currently focused, although it may seem to you to play riddles. It is simply a reflection on a topic that is very hot today.
The truth !!!!!! I use Debian, Ubuntu doesn't stop me from sleeping, for me to disappear. There are better Debian, Archlinux and some other options out there. With Pointlinux (based on debian 7) I am very comfortable. 🙂
I, like most people migrating from Windows to Linux, did it using Ubuntu. Later ... when I lost my fear of the terminal, I began to try other distros: OpenSuse, Kubuntu, Mint, ZorinOS, Mandriva, Sabayon (I really like the latter) among others. But in the end I always return to Ubuntu, why? .. well ... because it is the system that gives me everything I need.
Ubuntu had incredible versions and some quite bad and unstable, but it was always improving. The version I'm currently using (13.04) is incredibly stable, fast, and perfectly suited to my computer hardware.
I don't know what Linux would be without Ubuntu ... I don't know if that really has any importance, what I do know is that Ubuntu is an OS that meets all the requirements to become the real alternative to Windows ... and eventually displace it.
What? which Arch is better? ... well ... maybe the people of Arch should create or borrow an installer from another distro ... that the grace lies in the difficulty ...? Well ... then we are bothered by being called geeks.
In the Linux community, I notice ... how to say ... hysteria ... yeah ... hysteria is the word, we want to convince everyone that Linux is the best ... but we don't want our preferred distro to become massive ...
The core of Ubuntu is Linux, and made by the community or Canonical… it is an excellent OS.
Personally, it has done more favor than against, as those who disliked Ubuntu say they went to another distro. It also opened several doors and a more common development is impressive what it has done. Instead unity at the beginning I saw something that I did not like but ah programmed very well even for my taste I like smas unity that gnome with its interface. Currently I am fine with Arch because with Ubuntu I spent many things releasing, it was easier to install things that I needed. Ubuntu has done a lot for the community, whether in the end mir or wayland wins, the one who wins in the end is the user. From my point of view Ubuntu functionally with what everything has installed, its consumption of resources is justified. As long as the things that I am interested in are done in Ubuntu, I can run them in another distro, I am happy.
Ubuntu pays salaries and MKT to focus on the end user, something that few did before, since they focused on companies and technical users. Those that wanted to be easy for the user were paid and / or emulated windows (something embarrassing: Rxart, lindows). All that was changed. Not everything that is used is taken from debian and has a community of developers, just look at synaptic in the two distros. The immediate consequence is the fall of the wallpaper distros (it can be good). And since there will not be another millionaire who pays salaries (and few work for free) RedHat and rpm will once again be a standard. Debian is very strict when it comes to uploading and changing versions (note the stagnation in gnome 3.4), it does not develop as fast as fedora, and distros like Mint would be at a disadvantage to rpm, so they would migrate. Others based on pacman can greatly benefit users if Ubuntu falls, since they provide a similar experience, are pragmatic and are up-to-date.
Man, Debian has testing and unstable, stagnant RedHat which is still on gnome 2 and firefox 10.
Don't confuse redhat with RHEL. They also release fedora as a test distro and are in gnome development, so it's no wonder they're the first. Debian (which I use) focus on stability and cross-platform, hence it takes a long time (you have to compile for 10 architectures). In packages.debian.org you can find out if new versions were uploaded.
Red Hat Gnome 2 ??????? Gnome 3.10 will come in Fedora 20 with many changes, better stability and aesthetics.
What would Linux be without GNU?
And what will Linux be when Hurd arrives?
But seriously, Ubuntu will not cease to exist, and in the worst, worst, worst case that everyone abandons Ubuntu, it will surely be reborn again in a community like Mageia.
What will become of us without RSM? Haha…
I have always liked Ubuntu, even though I don't behave much in the direction it is taking. I think they have done a good job bringing people closer to Gnu / linux but nowadays Ubuntu is not the only one easy to install, other distributions have also achieved ease of use in addition to creating good communities.
That such.
You have to remember that Ubuntu is the son of Debian, so a world without Ubuntu would be the same. Before Ubuntu Linux existed, and quite well, with a more "unified" and less "divided" community. Ubuntu was a great idea and to some extent still is, but I don't think it has much of a future with the current vision.
Anyway, Mr. time will tell, I hope he survives and continues to contribute.
Debian is my mother
Haha!
I have been a user of Ubuntu in its beginnings when using gnome 2.
I would be saddened if Ubuntu disappeared, although its effort to separate itself from the rest of the distros (incidentally because of the business world, this issue has a crumb, and should be covered in depth) have distanced it from the linux community.
The controversy often comes from the Ubuntu world itself, they say they feel very alone and attacked (since it promotes projects that have nothing to do with the objectives of the community) and the ubuntuu-fans, usually people who only contribute their grain as a user of the distribution, they have a special aggressiveness towards the rest of the distributions, hearing phrases such as: "If Ubuntu disappears I'll go back to windows", or; "It is the only linux worthwhile on the desktop", etc ...
My conclusion is that the world would continue to rotate without them, I used linux for the first time in 2000-20011 when SUSE was German, not Novell. His yast was already a delight as it is now, and it was easily used on the desktop on intel-amd / nvidia machines and for its professional part there was no subscription to pay.
If Ubuntu ceases to exist ... the good thing about Linux is that there are a variety of distros available and very quickly another will take its place.
The times I have used Ubuntu it has been almost by imposition and not by my own choice, I think it is a too loaded distro, personally I prefer Slackware and it is the one I recommend to my acquaintances.
Well, if you ask me, Ubuntu (as a distribution for computers) will disappear in a few years, or rather, it will pass to The Community and it will not be the attention of Canonical, which will focus on the phone market .. U_U
I got into Linux thanks to Ubuntu. Then I tried with Mageia, Mint, Fedora. Today I have Windows7 and Ubuntu13.04 in coexistence.
I don't think the Linux world will be affected by the downgrading of Ubuntu. But if we must admit that many have migrated from Windows thanks to this distro.
Can you imagine a world without ubuntu?
http://youtu.be/S1BA6bAYnPQ
a touch of humor to bring out the drama lol
I do not comment much on internet sites, because in my center it is quite bad unfortunately and it is difficult for me to put a comment online, but with this post I will make an effort just to refute this phrase:
«Lately, there are many failures and bad decisions by Canonical: Unity, Mir, its union with Amazon, Ubuntu for TVs, Ubuntu Edge, etc.
..........................................
What's more, both Unity and Mir are largely “lonely” Canonical developments with almost no community involvement. "
I personally do not see any failures in what you say, I begin:
1- Unity, I don't use it, but that's not why I think it's a failure, on the contrary, it has become the default desktop for many people, it has improved a lot since its first versions, seen from your logic, KDE4 is a failure, because in the beginning, not everyone was in favor, nor was it very stable, etc, etc. On the other hand, if Unity or Mir are not used by the community, it is because they do not give their American desire, as we say in Cuba, because both projects are free, ah .. they are originally for a very particular distro, perhaps it is not the same Cinamon with Linux Mint? and I do not see that people are speaking pests of this environment, in short to criticize you should only be able to think….
2- Mir, here I can understand you a little more, but not completely agree with you, and I repeat, the fact that the other distros or projects do not support or support Mir does not automatically imply that it is a failure, and if you want An example looks at games on Linux, if Valve does not bet on this platform and demonstrate that it is possible, now the story is another and they would still see Linux as a platform for anything but to play. Also, although Mir's detractors insist on denying it, Mir accelerated the support and development of Wayland and although it will not be released in 13.10, it is not dead by any means, I think Canonical was smart in delaying it and not delivering a defective product.
3- Your union with Amazon, I think this is nonsense and I have always said that it is exaggerating, because if you do not like that the dash looks for results in Amazon you can disable it, that simple, it is true that many did not like it, but to the normal user who is in the paranoia of privacy (total, apparently with Amazon and without it they spy on us all: Lease case Prism), I am sure more than one has been useful.
4- Ubuntu for TV, this is not a failure, this only exists as many "hits" like Google TV, Apple TV, which have more time and I think they have the same success as Ubuntu TV, it is simply a very specific product.
5- Ubuntu Edge: Well taking into account that it is the campaign that has obtained the most funds in crossfounding (beating all records), and that it is an open project, I do not know how it can be a failure, only the figure was not reached that Canonical needed to be able to produce it, but more than a product, I think Ubuntu Edge was a very clear and loud message: You can achieve the phone of your dreams with something other than Android, Apple and WP (Nokia), it was a proposal that it provided a fresh and refreshing air in a market that increasingly "innovates" in putting RAM, inches and Cores to the phones and not in seeing them as really an all-in-one system like the Edge.
Anyway, I got lost in the part of Canonical's failures, anyway I continued reading the article and my answer is yes…. it would be a hard blow, although not definitive enough to send it (to linux) to the canvas.
regards
Launching Ubuntu Edge was risky and you know, you can't compete in a market saturated with Android, Apple and Windows. And that it cost the latter a lot to enter the market, can you imagine Ubuntu making a field among these heavyweights of the mobile market.
Honestly for my Ubuntu it is the Linux attempt to be Windows, and as Windows seems like rubbish to me, Ubuntu also seems like rubbish to me…. This is a perception that lately governs my reactions to any idea, opinion or news that comes from Ubuntu, especially because in a week version 13.10 comes out with more of the same, but I started to reflect on it and I understand how stupid it is to hate Windows as monopolistic and useless or Ubuntu as a manifestation of envy towards Windows. They are operating systems, work tools or entertainment or information and expression media but not something that should be taken very seriously. If Ubuntu disappears, good!, Windows and Mac will live a long time in the same way as Coca-Cola I have done it; Canonnical is too green to compete with them yet and I don't see much future for it, perhaps it will be absorbed by another company, more voracious, capitalist and monopolistic as any company that wants to survive in these times and com Petir in "the big leagues."
On the other hand, Linux in general freebsd, solaris, etc, etc, etc, are community forces that as such, late or early, will be distorted, will be lost and their influences will be nicely bottled to sell them at very expensive prices. When this happens at all ( that is already starting to happen with Canonnical and Ubuntu, or Windows 8.1, which could be said almost a fork of many Linux features) will come another operating system that will have its fans (in the literal sense of the word), it will fly the flag of freedom (¬¬ '?), Will criticize the rest of voracious monsters… .and with time his imprint will be sold in cardboard boxes.
The truth is a very incoherent and even absurd decision for users to stop using ubuntu, because ubuntu decided to implement (or impose) unity, in the repository you have many desktop, with an apt-get install it is more than enough to change desktop and no distro ... ordinary people are not aware of what it means to choose a distro for 11 years that I have been using Debian (From the Stable branch) and when I chose it it was not because it would have been nice or it had colored windows ... I chose it () for its repository, because it is really free and free, for its stability, for its versatility with respect to hardware ... and for its packaging system ...
It is not about putting or removing Unity or other packages, it is the profitability that scares Canonical, I think the money is missing.
Debian is not the whim of geeks and engineers but a system that seeks to bring together the best of FLOSS. If Debian is not easy for many, that is not the primary idea of the community, for that there is packaging and a lot of documentation so those who are interested in building a stable system can do it quietly.
For whatever you need Debian will always have a version. That is what the people of Ubuntu did but it is not necessarily the panacea they claim to be, rather they are a friendly system that at some point in its history was what they promised. What has helped Ubuntu is marketing and polishing certain aspects of system administration that are appreciated but not necessary for many.
The GNU / Linux Breakthrough comes from many sides to be affected by a few distros. Sure if Debian ceased to exist; Slackware; openSUSE; Fedora; CentOS, would greatly affect the FLOSS world radically. The development of many things would be slowed down.
I don't think Unity is a "failure and bad decision." And it's too early to speak ill of Mir
Mir no longer ventra in future releases of Ubuntu that has already been decided and those of Canonical propose a replacement, just as they have done in Red Hat Fedora 20.
Nothing would happen in reality because the community would continue its course as other comrades said there is a before Ubuntu.
Before Ubuntu I remember Mandriva, I think it was the first one I tried in which the Installation Gui allowed "newcomers" to be able to install alongside Windows Linux without losing the entire hard drive.
Ubuntu could be what the iPhone represented to the world of mobile technology. It was the first of a new generation, but before this one others have already made the journey.
Sometimes I wonder why I hate Ubuntu so much? That its users are lammers, that it is a ready-made distro, that avoids the use of the console ...
Linux's biggest cancer is its users. Communities hostile to the newbie (noob over there, lammer over here, don't you know how to Google it? Or they just don't respond). Do you expect that a user who has just left Windows, who wants to know more about what is called Linux, knows by inertia how to handle the console and that he has installed the programs he needs through make install?
Ubuntu has made a huge contribution to the Linux world, drawing disgruntled Windows users into this world. But if after a sudo apt-get update && apt-get upgrade the desktop environment goes to the other world (in appearance and for them), do you hope they don't ask?
I use Linux since Mandrake 10, now happy with Arch and I played Ubuntu on my return to the penguin and it is not as bad a distro as it is painted. It is a distro for the Windows user, not one for Arch or Gentoo. Does it mean that we more advanced users are on Olympus and that we should look down on newcomers? The only thing they achieve with their petulance is to remove new linuxers and continue to contribute to Linux continuing to have a marginal quota on the desktop.
Let's not forget that we were also "n00bs" for some.
The bull forgets when he was a calf.
And what would Ubuntu be without Debian?
Ubuntu is the fashionable distribution, just like other distributions were fashionable at the time.
Ubuntu did not help Linux only invented a friendly way to change the idea that Linux is for programmers, but they do everything for their benefit, there are distros like Fedora that do not boast of being great and have always carried the name Linux by flag, although maybe they don't carry the Gnu they recognize it.
Ubuntu is a distribution with a good vision, like many it was my first GNU / Linux distribution that I tried and I don't have much to criticize it. Like I have tried Debian and Ubuntu flavors. I think that in image if it would damage GNU / Linux because it is the most commercial distribution.
But I do not think it will die soon and less if they continue with the innovative vision and Ubuntu in servers if it is a reliable competitor (Of course not with as much experience as Windows, Apple or RedHat) but it tries to give a good service, an example of its client is Wikipedia .
Mint Substitute for Ubuntu? It may or may not be, Mint is dependent on Ubuntu and it would be very difficult for them to change the base to Debian would be a throwback to the advances already made.
While Ubuntu has some objectionable issues; the truth is that they have known how to do things well and are where they are because they deserved it.
Reading some comments I realize that this is why GNU / LINUX is never going to stop being just for computer nerds with all due respect. Ubuntu will not be the best distro but what if it is?
I say because they have all contributed different things but whether we like it or not Ubuntu made people with a beginner level in computing turn to Linux and that I started with Mandrake. To those who say of Debian, it will be very good but it is far from being friendly with people who do not need knowledge of computer engineering like other distros.
So we are going very well, to continue putting the name of GNU / LINUX in the segment of only for advanced users or in short only for nerds.