8 ms·

That experiment is a little biased. It wasn't an example of a person who doesn't know how to use computers trying out ubuntu. It was an example of a person who'

by aflag 19y ago

That experiment is a little biased. It wasn't an example of a person who doesn't know how to use computers trying out ubuntu. It was an example of a person who's very confortable with Windows trying to use a different Operating System. The test about using youtube is particularly bad. It's good that Ubuntu doesn't come with flash, it would be even better if it didn't even tell you about it. Maybe in the future it might come with gnash already installed (you may want to install it, I'm sure it's on the repositories, even my debian etch has it). For youtube specifically, as I understand the latest totem comes with a plugin that allows you to watch youtube videos directly from totem, another alternative for using youtube without flash. And yes, I'm a free software extremist, who simply doesn't get it, who will forever be wrong. And I'm too radical, things can't be taken so seriously, I'll never find a girlfriend. I know all that. Still, the purpose of Ubuntu is to spread the use of free software, not to be another system offering propertary software. If the free software already available is not enough for some people, I guess we'll just have to wait (not change our systems so it includes propertary stuff).

mmmurf 19y ago
Uh, so you're saying that the reason Ubuntu doesn't ship with Flash installed is to inconvenience users so that they will better appreciate free software -- because it <i>did</i> come installed unlike the evil proprietary Flash player? Just as Ubuntu now has "restricted drivers" it should also have "popular non-free apps", and a screen should appear on the first boot that lets the user install flash, skype, etc. It seems silly that a hard line on a few small apps is making it so nearly any windows or mac user will get scared off by Ubuntu in the first 10 minutes.
- Prrometheus 19y ago
  Also, getting DVD support to work was "challenging" to put it mildly.
  - coffeeaddicted 19y ago
    Yeah, but due to the unfortunate DRM restrictions I don't see how that could be solved currently. Well, except by offering more comfortable torrent clients to avoid DVD's completely ... which is done already ;-)
    - Prrometheus 19y ago
      Well, it could be easier. I had to try three or four different approaches that I found on messageboards before I found one that worked. In the end, I had to enable a few new repositories, download a few new plug-ins, modules, and etc., and change the back-end software on my movie-player (Who knew that movie-players had back-ends? I didn't!).
      - coffeeaddicted 19y ago
        From what I heard so far the problem seems to be that sites trying to make it more comfortable for users (like giving them actual guidelines) get often warning letters from lawyers. And not many projects want to risk legal battles. At least that's the way here in germany, but I suppose it's not much different in the US.
- aflag 19y ago
  Proprietary software is not evil, is just bad for society. Or at least not as good as free software. I don't like that kind of behaviour from ubuntu, such as offering restricted drivers and suggesting for the user the installation of proprietary codecs -- I've been told it does that, I might be wrong. That's supporting the use of proprietary software, which I don't think shouldn't be the goal of any GNU/Linux distribution. In that sense I only wish ubuntu has less support for proprietary software, not more. The thing that should attract people into GNU/Linux is the free software philosophy. If they're going to use GNU/Linux without even worrying about what free software is, then I don't care at all if they are using it or not. Why should anyone involved in free software development care about people who doesn't care about free software? Why should I care about someone who doesn't even make an effort in trying to stay away from non-free software, unless they have absolutely no choice? Ubuntu doesn't ship with Flash to the convenience of the users who want to use free software -- so they don't have to uninstall it (or worse, use it without realising it's non-free).
  - krschultz 19y ago
    There are a lot of things that attract people to GNU/Linux, philosophy is not the one that got it this far. Philosophy got you Hurd, practicality got you Linux. I jumped into GNU/Linux because I use it for robotics and I could develop and deploy on the same platform, free software came later after I appreciated it, and now I contribute to several open source projects and work for an open source company. If I had been turned off by these difficulties early I wouldn't be doing what I am today, that is what Ubuntu is for, not the purists, it is for an introduction.
  - mmmurf 19y ago
    People get involved in free software for all kinds of reasons. I personally prefer the MIT license philosophy (pure freedom) over the GPL philsophy (restricted freedom)... the GPL has done better than the BSD license b/c it's more free, and over time the MIT license will likely triumph, at least to the extent that linux itself being GPL doesn't hinder progress too much. It's a bit ironic that the whole point of the GPL is to control how others use the code! My point is simply that Ubuntu is not an ideological undertaking, it's a business. Thus, it should have a simple screen that loads on the first boot that lets a new user avoid ending up with a crippled system, when perfectly good (free as in beer) software exists. This will only help the Free Software world, since more people using Linux means more support for existing open source code and for new projects. The real problem with closed source is that it fails to harness the willing contributors who would fix bugs, etc. Even OpenLaszlo uses the adobe runtime... so by shipping Ubuntu w/o a working swf runtime installed, Ubuntu's maintainers are harming at least one vibrant open source project.
- wanorris 19y ago
  > Just as Ubuntu now has "restricted drivers" it should also have "popular non-free apps", and a screen should appear on the first boot that lets the user install flash, skype, etc. Actually, it does come with a package called "Ubuntu restricted extras" that installs flash, LAME, DVD playback, the JRE, etc. If you wander through Add/Remove Applications, it's there and easy to install. The problem is that they don't follow the rest of your suggestion and make people aware of it on first launch.
brk 19y ago
Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never viewed computer usage as a militant adherence to a single software pricing model. I view it as using the best combination of OS and apps that suit my needs, in combination with offering the best cost to usability ratio. Who cares if the software is free or paid? OSS or proprietary? Find what works best for YOU, and go with it. Note that the best answer is likely to be very different person to person. Fanboys of any denomination are all equally annoying and blind.
- vikas5678 19y ago
  Yeah, free or otherwise, software should be a pleasure to use, and I think the linux guys are missing a big part of the market share because of issues like the ones covered in the link. If a average(non programmer/linux literate) person can install ubuntu/linux and start using it full swing without having to jump through hoops and pull out some hair, thats when will linux get its fair share of the market.
  - aflag 19y ago
    I don't know what you call a "linux guy". Nonetheless, I consider myself a "free software guy", GNU/Linux is just one of the possibilities when you are looking for free software. We are not looking for as many people using GNU/Linux as possible (althought that's sure much better than people using nothing but proprietary software). We are looking for many people supporting free software. So, having tons of users who don't contribute or care about free software doesn't make me happy. I'm not saying we should drop usability, it's important, it's nice, but we shouldn't confuse lack of proprietary application with usability, that's all.
    - ks 19y ago
      > Why should anyone involved in free software development care about people who doesn't care about free software? Sometimes the end justifies the means. I'm sure that many of the Firefox converts didn't switch because of their love of free software. But it forces web developers to think about standards and not limit their web pages to Internet Explorer. So more users benefit you directly.
jdavid 19y ago
don't forget that you will never be able to earn a living selling free software. instead, you will only be paid for your time fixing small bugs. you will be forced in to a life of non-innovation.
jdavid 19y ago
dude, you are missing the point. I CAN HACK the registry in WINDOWS, but i can't figure out WHERE to find information on fixing my nVidia Drivers on a released version of Ubuntu. Vista has the same problem. Which is why XP is the best OS right now. Things are most likely to just work.

by aflag 19y ago

mmmurf 19y ago

Uh, so you're saying that the reason Ubuntu doesn't ship with Flash installed is to inconvenience users so that they will better appreciate free software -- because it <i>did</i> come installed unlike the evil proprietary Flash player? Just as Ubuntu now has "restricted drivers" it should also have "popular non-free apps", and a screen should appear on the first boot that lets the user install flash, skype, etc. It seems silly that a hard line on a few small apps is making it so nearly any windows or mac user will get scared off by Ubuntu in the first 10 minutes.

Prrometheus 19y ago
Also, getting DVD support to work was "challenging" to put it mildly.
- coffeeaddicted 19y ago
  Yeah, but due to the unfortunate DRM restrictions I don't see how that could be solved currently. Well, except by offering more comfortable torrent clients to avoid DVD's completely ... which is done already ;-)
  - Prrometheus 19y ago
    Well, it could be easier. I had to try three or four different approaches that I found on messageboards before I found one that worked. In the end, I had to enable a few new repositories, download a few new plug-ins, modules, and etc., and change the back-end software on my movie-player (Who knew that movie-players had back-ends? I didn't!).
    - coffeeaddicted 19y ago
      From what I heard so far the problem seems to be that sites trying to make it more comfortable for users (like giving them actual guidelines) get often warning letters from lawyers. And not many projects want to risk legal battles. At least that's the way here in germany, but I suppose it's not much different in the US.
aflag 19y ago
Proprietary software is not evil, is just bad for society. Or at least not as good as free software. I don't like that kind of behaviour from ubuntu, such as offering restricted drivers and suggesting for the user the installation of proprietary codecs -- I've been told it does that, I might be wrong. That's supporting the use of proprietary software, which I don't think shouldn't be the goal of any GNU/Linux distribution. In that sense I only wish ubuntu has less support for proprietary software, not more. The thing that should attract people into GNU/Linux is the free software philosophy. If they're going to use GNU/Linux without even worrying about what free software is, then I don't care at all if they are using it or not. Why should anyone involved in free software development care about people who doesn't care about free software? Why should I care about someone who doesn't even make an effort in trying to stay away from non-free software, unless they have absolutely no choice? Ubuntu doesn't ship with Flash to the convenience of the users who want to use free software -- so they don't have to uninstall it (or worse, use it without realising it's non-free).
- krschultz 19y ago
  There are a lot of things that attract people to GNU/Linux, philosophy is not the one that got it this far. Philosophy got you Hurd, practicality got you Linux. I jumped into GNU/Linux because I use it for robotics and I could develop and deploy on the same platform, free software came later after I appreciated it, and now I contribute to several open source projects and work for an open source company. If I had been turned off by these difficulties early I wouldn't be doing what I am today, that is what Ubuntu is for, not the purists, it is for an introduction.
- mmmurf 19y ago
  People get involved in free software for all kinds of reasons. I personally prefer the MIT license philosophy (pure freedom) over the GPL philsophy (restricted freedom)... the GPL has done better than the BSD license b/c it's more free, and over time the MIT license will likely triumph, at least to the extent that linux itself being GPL doesn't hinder progress too much. It's a bit ironic that the whole point of the GPL is to control how others use the code! My point is simply that Ubuntu is not an ideological undertaking, it's a business. Thus, it should have a simple screen that loads on the first boot that lets a new user avoid ending up with a crippled system, when perfectly good (free as in beer) software exists. This will only help the Free Software world, since more people using Linux means more support for existing open source code and for new projects. The real problem with closed source is that it fails to harness the willing contributors who would fix bugs, etc. Even OpenLaszlo uses the adobe runtime... so by shipping Ubuntu w/o a working swf runtime installed, Ubuntu's maintainers are harming at least one vibrant open source project.
wanorris 19y ago
> Just as Ubuntu now has "restricted drivers" it should also have "popular non-free apps", and a screen should appear on the first boot that lets the user install flash, skype, etc. Actually, it does come with a package called "Ubuntu restricted extras" that installs flash, LAME, DVD playback, the JRE, etc. If you wander through Add/Remove Applications, it's there and easy to install. The problem is that they don't follow the rest of your suggestion and make people aware of it on first launch.

brk 19y ago

Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never viewed computer usage as a militant adherence to a single software pricing model. I view it as using the best combination of OS and apps that suit my needs, in combination with offering the best cost to usability ratio. Who cares if the software is free or paid? OSS or proprietary? Find what works best for YOU, and go with it. Note that the best answer is likely to be very different person to person. Fanboys of any denomination are all equally annoying and blind.

vikas5678 19y ago
Yeah, free or otherwise, software should be a pleasure to use, and I think the linux guys are missing a big part of the market share because of issues like the ones covered in the link. If a average(non programmer/linux literate) person can install ubuntu/linux and start using it full swing without having to jump through hoops and pull out some hair, thats when will linux get its fair share of the market.
- aflag 19y ago
  I don't know what you call a "linux guy". Nonetheless, I consider myself a "free software guy", GNU/Linux is just one of the possibilities when you are looking for free software. We are not looking for as many people using GNU/Linux as possible (althought that's sure much better than people using nothing but proprietary software). We are looking for many people supporting free software. So, having tons of users who don't contribute or care about free software doesn't make me happy. I'm not saying we should drop usability, it's important, it's nice, but we shouldn't confuse lack of proprietary application with usability, that's all.
  - ks 19y ago
    > Why should anyone involved in free software development care about people who doesn't care about free software? Sometimes the end justifies the means. I'm sure that many of the Firefox converts didn't switch because of their love of free software. But it forces web developers to think about standards and not limit their web pages to Internet Explorer. So more users benefit you directly.

jdavid 19y ago

don't forget that you will never be able to earn a living selling free software. instead, you will only be paid for your time fixing small bugs. you will be forced in to a life of non-innovation.

jdavid 19y ago

dude, you are missing the point. I CAN HACK the registry in WINDOWS, but i can't figure out WHERE to find information on fixing my nVidia Drivers on a released version of Ubuntu. Vista has the same problem. Which is why XP is the best OS right now. Things are most likely to just work.