Ubuntu Founder Officially Gives up Trying to Topple Microsoft

39

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

gmvolk

I've tried so many different distro's over the years and each one, while promising, never could deliver the ease of use and installation of Windows. That is Linux'x biggest failure and why it could never topple Windows. Android has the chance if Google can control its fragmentation.

avatar

Renegade Knight

Fragmentation is a problem suffered by every OS. The only thing that makes Android different is that you can walk into a store and buy brand new tablets and phones and get several different generations.

However that Android has generations is exactly the same as every other OS.

Overall though I've had the most probelms with iOS fragmentation.

avatar

whr4usa

fragmentation *can* be suffered by every OS but it is not true to state that EVERY OS "has it"
- Windows Server 2003 and its offspring like Windows XP 64-bit and Vista RTM\SP0 was the last time any Microsoft OS had fragmentation issues
- HP/Palm webOS never did, either
- iOS never did until iPhones were nolonger AT&T exclusives and iPads happened
- MacOS didn't until they moved from PPC to x86
- BlackBerry and QNX never have to my knowledge
- the Fedora\RHEL\CEntOS\OpenSuse side of Linux development also never has to my knowledge
- BusyBox, VMware have always had serious issues with this too

having multiple generations != fragmentation

fragmentation is caused by poor design and a lack of strategy not amending or deprecating feature-and-API-sets in a predictable manner while innovating both technologically and economically
i.e. not being able to run win32 on windows rt != fragmentation
i.a.e. having to code a dozen variations of an identical app to account for differences in minor versions of platform software on identical hardware in Android is (or vice versa in the case of iOS and pretty much anything else based on Debian)

avatar

whr4usa

++1

"if google can control android gragmentation"
that's funny!

avatar

maxeeemum

Canonical was doing good making Ubuntu and Linux more popular until founder Mark Shuttleworth decided to go with the "my way or the highway policy". When Ubuntu went to the "Unity" desktop and told the community tough $hit they screwed themselves. They lost a lot of users with many moving to Linux Mint. The funny thing is that Unity bares some resemblance to W8 Metro.

avatar

thewildman

Turned me off, especially with the task bar stuck on the left screen anchor

avatar

Renegade Knight

Unity sucks. Metro I can at least figure out.

avatar

Renegade Knight

...

avatar

KeyboardNinja

Never give up, never surrender ._.

avatar

whr4usa

until its too late!!

"success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts"

avatar

Baer

And Droid and ios are open source?
As for Linux, I am starting to play with it but there are so many things that is just does not do out of the box that I can not see myself doing much more than playing with it ands learning about it for the foreseeable future.

avatar

whr4usa

android and ios are both butcherings of debian
the difference is android started with a Linux kernel and screwed up whereas ios began with a bsd kernel and screwed it up
neither is preferable (of course neither is Ubuntu)

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

Any motherboard tied to a single Operating System should be noted in ALL motherboard reviews from now on

Filed under>
Stuff we need to know when making "OUR" choice, and... The mistake of calling motherboards PC compatible when they don't even run XP

avatar

captainjack

I second this suggestion

avatar

nsvander

Its not that they aren't compatible it's that the technology has surpassed the driver support. You can't expect a company to maintain drivers for every piece of hardware for every operating system, the overhead would cost way to much.

avatar

whr4usa

++1

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

You are making a driver issue where there is none...

Whether or not a current motherboard restricts the installation of specific operating systems is the issue

If the motherboard allows the installation of an older operating system, then there really would be no driver issues

Driver issues only arise when we are blocked from installing an O.S. that is compatible with the hardware drivers for said device

avatar

warptek2010

I'm somewhat confused. How exactly does the motherboard allow or disallow the installation of any operating system? Unless you're talking about a modern motherboard built with the latest chipset of which an older OS would probably not have the vendor support through drivers?

avatar

dgrmouse

warptek2010 asked, "How exactly does the motherboard allow or disallow the installation of any operating system?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_restrictions#Verified.2Ftrusted.2Fsecure_boot

Trusted Computing, in general, has been contrived not to benefit end-users, but to benefit software providers and content owners - often to the detriment of end-users.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

UEFI, walled garden, or whatever you want to call it

Pick one

Can I please use the hardware I already have or must I buy everything again and get locked into a closed system that I do not control but must pay for nonetheless?

Can I?

Please?

avatar

Sirius

Ahh, you are correct, except for the fact that all UEFI currently in use either have the option to disable SecureBoot and/or TPM or lack those features altogether. So far there is not a single mainboard on the market for desktop or laptop that does not have the option to turn off SecureBoot or TPM. Currently, the only locked down systems are tablets and phones. So your point is moot, for the moment at least. If you can install Windows XP onto a brand new system, then I suggest the fault is yours, not the hardware.

avatar

whr4usa

++1

I like your Sirius thinking sir!

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

"Currently"

I like to stay on top of emerging detrimental trends

avatar

whr4usa

your personal insistence on continually using a 32-bit-only client OS using an heavily modified and bloated version of a kernel originally built in 1999 centered around a 16-bit supervisor from 1987 which lacks natie support for the following common technologies/protocols/standards
- wireless communications (including WiFi)
- fibroptic communications (including IR)
- broadband communications
- HD video (widescreen)
- [Unified] Extensible Firmware Interface
- GUID Partitioning Tables
- exFAT/fat64 (part of SDXC spx.)
- VHD/VHDX mount/boot
- Trusted Platform Modules
- IPv6
- HTML V.
- 64-bit
- WinPE
- XML (including DocX, XPS, PDF/A, WIM, WIC, PS, WMI, X-hives)
- ReFS
- SATA/SAS
- SSD's
- SecureDigital\CompactFlash
- sandboxing
- kernel-mode or/and stack-level firewalls
- non-destructive omniscient antivirus (an actual term in bluehat circles)

I can go forever.

XP SP3 loses all support less than a couples weeks after March 2014 ends ...its activation servers will nolonger be guaranteed available after January 2015 and same story for its validation servers December 2015

Windows 7 and Server 2008 R2 with SP1 don't lose security updates until after 2021-2022 (even longer if SP2 happens or its artificially extended like 2003 was)
Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 SP1 won't become unsupported until 2025 or longer

Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2012 requires no licensing and will run forever

get a life Bullinkle

avatar

whr4usa

as per usual, Bullwinkle is clueless and warptek is clueful, lol.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

Yup
That was funny

avatar

BobbyPhoenix

I just recently switched to Ubuntu from Windows. I don't like Windows 8, and I figured if I'm going to have to "upgrade" soon, and learn a new OS, I may as well go the free and open route. I must say I wish I did it a while ago. I don't miss Windows at all. Anything and everything I used on Windows I can find for Ubuntu. I now recommend it to anyone asking "Should I get Windows 8?".

avatar

Bucket_Monster

Switching to Ubuntu from Windows entirely depends on what you do. There can be vital programs and apps that won't work properly in Linux, even with Wine. Not to mention the spotty hardware support. The Atheros network adapter on my Gigabyte motherboard still isn't recognized in Linux and not through the fault of Gigabyte. Linux a lot of times doesn't work straight up out of the box with no issues. I have yet to run an installation of Ubuntu that I didn't have to resort to the terminal for one thing or another which quite frankly, in 2013 is ridiculous.

I really wanted to like Linux, but I have always given up and gone back to windows. Until Linux gets real support from hardware and software vendors I can't see this ever changing. I don't have the time and patience to sit there googling and scouring forums searching for fixes to all the quirks or issues I've encountered.

I'm not a Windows fanboy, I'm a fanboy of something that works out of the box with minimal effort.

avatar

Hey.That_Dude

AS far as I know, all the Atheros Network Adapters work out of box with Linux, especially if it was made in the last 5 years. I don't know what your problem is, but I bet it's a diver conflict more than a lack of drivers.
True, some people hate the terminal. But I love being able to say exactly what I want the OS to do. I will agree that downloading applications is a pain, but for some people (read: virus prone people/Grandparents) that might actually be a GOOD thing.
And there is going to be a lack of software so long as Linux makes up 1% of the home user market. That's just the way capitalism works.

avatar

Sirius

Actually they are correct, the latest Atheros onboard network controllers are not supported by default within the download of any distribution. You have to download the package ahead of time, install Ubuntu or Mint etc. Then once installed, load in the package. Specifically motherboards similar to and including the Gigabyte Z77/H77 which run Atheros AR8161 network controller.

avatar

AFDozerman

Since when is downloading software a pain? Just google it and download, or, for even less technically inclined people, go to the software manager and just search it.

avatar

Sirius

It's not a pain, until you realize that you just wiped your system clean and installed Ubuntu only to find out the very driver you need to get on the Internet with in the first place is not there. Which forces you to go to another system that is connected to get the package. For those of us with more than one system, it's not a huge deal. But for others, with only one computer, it requires getting with a friend or acquaintance, driving over, downloading, then returning home. And that can be a PITA. At least I hope you realize that without the network controller driver loaded, using the software manager to "just search for it" doesn't work.

avatar

dgrmouse

AFDozerman asked, "Since when is downloading software a pain?"

In the case of Linux, there are often HUGE dependency chains that can be very difficult to navigate. Even for experienced users, cases where different software requires different package versions can be difficult to resolve.

avatar

wumpus

Yes, except that both apt-get (for debian based systems like ubuntu and mint) and yum (for rpm based systems like Fedora and red hat) both handle all of this for you. Ubuntu even as a "software center" (think app store) that lets you go through lists and click all you want (almost, but not all, is free).

Finding and downloading all the missing stuff, and typing those idiotic keys on Windows is the real hassle of a wiped install. Sounds like you haven't installed linux (or windows) since about 2004 (and forgotten the hassle of swapping cds on windows back in the day. I don't windows has been easier to install since about 2000, but I didn't use Linux much before that).

avatar

gmvolk

Swapping around CD's is no big deal. At least when all is said and done when Windows gets installed, 99% of your hardware just works. Can't say the same with any distro I have tried, and I've tried lots. When your network does not work after a Linux install, your screwed unless you have another PC handy. Course the problem there is most hardware vendors don't supply the necessary drivers for Linux with their product on CD, if they did I am sure it would not be a problem. Windows is dominant(at least for now) because only MS can change the OS. Apple's OSes work, because only Apple can change their OS. Android works because only Google can make the OS. Linux has too many people that can make changes to the OS and therefore it has problems. Ubuntu tried to change that and it did succeed in making Linux more accessible to more people, but it can still be changed by too many.

avatar

Vano

Comparing apples and oranges, aren't we?
Mark Shuttleworth is full of it.

avatar

warptek2010

He's absolutely right about at least on thing here: "Back in 2004 he believed pretty strongly that all PC’s should ship with primarily free and open operating systems." Windows of course is great and works great out of the box but the licensing can and often is an irritating experience for DIY computer builders and people re-installing. I've been made to jump through hoops to either install my legal copy of Windows on new hardware or re-install because that process breaks activation.

avatar

whr4usa

Microsoft licensing for 7/8/2012 is the simplest ever invented

that guy is quite correct; the Msft of today is nothing like it was circa server 2003

avatar

AFDozerman

Android isn't Linux as we know it. Yes, because of Android, the Linux kernel is the most used "OS" in the world, but the actual userland is nothing of the sort that Linus would have dreamed of. Still not time to shout victory. I imagine as consumer desktops die off, though, MS will lose interest in dominating this market and alternative OSes will fill the void... Maybe even BSD will see a brighter future soon... or not. :/

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.