5 ms·

Ubuntu used to be Debian that just worked. Now it's trying to be something more, but it seems to have lost the "just works" part. When I tried 11.10, I had prob

by Zak 15y ago

Ubuntu used to be Debian that just worked. Now it's trying to be something more, but it seems to have lost the "just works" part. When I tried 11.10, I had problems with several of the desktop environments crashing or being very visibly broken. I had poor graphics performance. I had no suspend/resume. All of these things worked on the same computer a year ago. I think Ubuntu may be trying to move too fast. Moving fast is great if you can pull it off, but it's not worth breaking the basic functions of the OS to get a more flashy UI. If Ubuntu does want to copy Apple, there's one major thing they need to learn: Apple releases features when they're done.

phamilton 15y ago
My biggest problem with Ubuntu is that it seems like you can treat it like Debian, but you can't. I don't know how many times I've updated files in /etc and had them rewritten by the Ubuntu specific GUIs without me knowing it. I almost want Ubuntu to either abandon the traditional Debian subsystem or have a "Power User" configuration where you can tell it to use /etc files over the GUI config.
- Zak 15y ago
  I think Mint Debian Edition may be what you want. It's providing me with what I used to get from Ubuntu.
kungfooey 15y ago
I agree with you. I have been an Ubuntu user since 6.06, and 11.10 was the buggiest release yet, by far. I actually bought a Mac on Friday. I need a development environment that works. I don't like spending time yak-shaving when I could be solving real problems.
- 0x0x0x 15y ago
  And interestingly enough to what some are complaining about the screen saver, on OS X the screen saver, desktop picture, and sound theme are bastard children with near zero updates in a decade. Straight up. But they're still customizable for people who want to. What's wrong with that? Just provide a standard install location and let those that want to utilize it do so. As an avid Mac OS X/Linux/Ubuntu user, I really truly don't get the direction Canonical is heading with Unity. edit: spelling
- hans 15y ago
  same here! I've been mulling over a mac book as this unity desktop is killing me, just have the mac as the desktop, and keep it headless linux.
tung 15y ago
I totally agree. Unity in particular feels like alpha quality software. I like the idea of a sleek, modern, composited desktop, but Unity isn't there yet. Releasing early and often is good. Pushing that software on people who didn't choose it is not. I feel like there should have been a "Try Unity" button at the Ubuntu installer so people like me could just wait until it's ready. Maybe I'll be happy with Unity in two years. But in that time I'll have to suffer stuttering, lag and the whims of armchair UI theorists who think Alt-Tab should jump workspaces by default.
cpeterso 15y ago
Besides Unity, what does Ubuntu currently offer that Debian's testing or unstable releases don't? I'm also surprised that people are using Ubuntu on servers.
- hack_edu 15y ago
  It's perfect for a tiny dev server or toy machine. I was surprised, and tend to use Ubuntu on my non-critical servers. Debian testing/unstable works just great; I keep meaning to move toward it instead. Though I really do feel that Ubuntu packages come better configured and ready to go. None of this has bit me in the ass yet.
- technomancy 15y ago
  I consider myself ideologically more in line with Debian, but their refusal to support my wifi card along with an install process that's just got a few nasty quirks made me wary when I made the switch to stable a few months ago. Multiple spectacular failures upon upgrading to testing pushed me back to Ubuntu for the time being.
- morsch 15y ago
  Launchpad PPAs? Not sure if there's any way to make them work with Debian. Maybe all of those updated software versions are in Debian unstable, but I doubt it, which leaves downloading tarballs, yuck.
cookiecaper 15y ago
The problem is that Ubuntu is not focusing on the fundamentals and they're not putting enough money into testing. I know well and good that Ubuntu was conceived because Shuttleworth felt that Linux was ready for the big time and that Red Hat etc had too much penchant to devote resources into low-level bickering that ultimately had relatively little effect on your average end user instead of focusing on improving user experience, but now that Ubuntu has moved the user experience so far forward, they should reconsider that mission. The places where Linux is most lacking is low-level compatibility for things like fast 3D acceleration and power management. Canonical should use some of its funds (aka "Mark Shuttleworth's money") to buy the 100 best selling laptop models each year, set rigorous testing standards, spend six months developing a new release and then take however long is necessary to make sure that everything passes on the last three years' best selling laptops. In this process, they should not be shy about contribution to X, kernel, etc., and should distribute patched versions of these if necessary to get compatibility. That, combined with Ubuntu's user experience work, is what will really make Linux a completely viable desktop computing platform. Far too often things break between releases and/or upgrades.
- Zak 15y ago
  The problem is that Ubuntu is not focusing on the fundamentals and they're not putting enough money into testing. I think you made my point more succinctly than I did. I think the UX was just fine in last year's Ubuntu. You could argue about whether Gnome 2.x was as slick as Windows 7 or OS X (I think it was at least better than Windows), but I don't think there's much doubt the system was usable by non-geeks. The first thing to break for me was suspend/resume, with one of 10.10's kernel updates. I reverted to an older kernel and hoped 11.04 would fix the problem. It didn't, and it precluded running the older, working kernel. Performance also got worse, and I can't think of any noteworthy improvements as I didn't consider Unity ready for prime time. So then 11.10 came out. Reviews said Unity was great now and everything ran smoothly, so I pulled the trigger on the upgrade. Unity did, in fact mostly work, though it was slow and glitchy. Oh well, back to Gnome Classic. Of course, it's Gnome 3 now and I can't even move the clock. That won't do, but I've heard the new Gnome 3 gnome-shell is awesome, and I have a video card that can handle it. It loads, slowly, but UI components sometimes vanish when I try to interact with them. Eventually, X crashes. Oh well, that gives me an opportunity to see what progress KDE 4 has made. I can report that the error messages for Plasma crashing look like they've had some attention from a designer since the last time I saw them. Good work. I'm running Linux Mint Debian Edition with Xfce now. Still no suspend/resume, but everything else works. The Linux desktop experience is almost back to where it was two years ago. Yay leadership!

by Zak 15y ago

phamilton 15y ago

My biggest problem with Ubuntu is that it seems like you can treat it like Debian, but you can't. I don't know how many times I've updated files in /etc and had them rewritten by the Ubuntu specific GUIs without me knowing it. I almost want Ubuntu to either abandon the traditional Debian subsystem or have a "Power User" configuration where you can tell it to use /etc files over the GUI config.

Zak 15y ago
I think Mint Debian Edition may be what you want. It's providing me with what I used to get from Ubuntu.

kungfooey 15y ago

I agree with you. I have been an Ubuntu user since 6.06, and 11.10 was the buggiest release yet, by far. I actually bought a Mac on Friday. I need a development environment that works. I don't like spending time yak-shaving when I could be solving real problems.

0x0x0x 15y ago
And interestingly enough to what some are complaining about the screen saver, on OS X the screen saver, desktop picture, and sound theme are bastard children with near zero updates in a decade. Straight up. But they're still customizable for people who want to. What's wrong with that? Just provide a standard install location and let those that want to utilize it do so. As an avid Mac OS X/Linux/Ubuntu user, I really truly don't get the direction Canonical is heading with Unity. edit: spelling
hans 15y ago
same here! I've been mulling over a mac book as this unity desktop is killing me, just have the mac as the desktop, and keep it headless linux.

tung 15y ago

I totally agree. Unity in particular feels like alpha quality software. I like the idea of a sleek, modern, composited desktop, but Unity isn't there yet. Releasing early and often is good. Pushing that software on people who didn't choose it is not. I feel like there should have been a "Try Unity" button at the Ubuntu installer so people like me could just wait until it's ready. Maybe I'll be happy with Unity in two years. But in that time I'll have to suffer stuttering, lag and the whims of armchair UI theorists who think Alt-Tab should jump workspaces by default.

cpeterso 15y ago

Besides Unity, what does Ubuntu currently offer that Debian's testing or unstable releases don't? I'm also surprised that people are using Ubuntu on servers.

hack_edu 15y ago
It's perfect for a tiny dev server or toy machine. I was surprised, and tend to use Ubuntu on my non-critical servers. Debian testing/unstable works just great; I keep meaning to move toward it instead. Though I really do feel that Ubuntu packages come better configured and ready to go. None of this has bit me in the ass yet.
technomancy 15y ago
I consider myself ideologically more in line with Debian, but their refusal to support my wifi card along with an install process that's just got a few nasty quirks made me wary when I made the switch to stable a few months ago. Multiple spectacular failures upon upgrading to testing pushed me back to Ubuntu for the time being.
morsch 15y ago
Launchpad PPAs? Not sure if there's any way to make them work with Debian. Maybe all of those updated software versions are in Debian unstable, but I doubt it, which leaves downloading tarballs, yuck.

cookiecaper 15y ago

The problem is that Ubuntu is not focusing on the fundamentals and they're not putting enough money into testing. I know well and good that Ubuntu was conceived because Shuttleworth felt that Linux was ready for the big time and that Red Hat etc had too much penchant to devote resources into low-level bickering that ultimately had relatively little effect on your average end user instead of focusing on improving user experience, but now that Ubuntu has moved the user experience so far forward, they should reconsider that mission. The places where Linux is most lacking is low-level compatibility for things like fast 3D acceleration and power management. Canonical should use some of its funds (aka "Mark Shuttleworth's money") to buy the 100 best selling laptop models each year, set rigorous testing standards, spend six months developing a new release and then take however long is necessary to make sure that everything passes on the last three years' best selling laptops. In this process, they should not be shy about contribution to X, kernel, etc., and should distribute patched versions of these if necessary to get compatibility. That, combined with Ubuntu's user experience work, is what will really make Linux a completely viable desktop computing platform. Far too often things break between releases and/or upgrades.

Zak 15y ago
The problem is that Ubuntu is not focusing on the fundamentals and they're not putting enough money into testing. I think you made my point more succinctly than I did. I think the UX was just fine in last year's Ubuntu. You could argue about whether Gnome 2.x was as slick as Windows 7 or OS X (I think it was at least better than Windows), but I don't think there's much doubt the system was usable by non-geeks. The first thing to break for me was suspend/resume, with one of 10.10's kernel updates. I reverted to an older kernel and hoped 11.04 would fix the problem. It didn't, and it precluded running the older, working kernel. Performance also got worse, and I can't think of any noteworthy improvements as I didn't consider Unity ready for prime time. So then 11.10 came out. Reviews said Unity was great now and everything ran smoothly, so I pulled the trigger on the upgrade. Unity did, in fact mostly work, though it was slow and glitchy. Oh well, back to Gnome Classic. Of course, it's Gnome 3 now and I can't even move the clock. That won't do, but I've heard the new Gnome 3 gnome-shell is awesome, and I have a video card that can handle it. It loads, slowly, but UI components sometimes vanish when I try to interact with them. Eventually, X crashes. Oh well, that gives me an opportunity to see what progress KDE 4 has made. I can report that the error messages for Plasma crashing look like they've had some attention from a designer since the last time I saw them. Good work. I'm running Linux Mint Debian Edition with Xfce now. Still no suspend/resume, but everything else works. The Linux desktop experience is almost back to where it was two years ago. Yay leadership!