3 ms·

You mean like this: http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/ http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/ ? Or this: http://www.kubu

You mean like this: http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/ http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/904features/ ? Or this: http://www.kubuntu.org/news/9.04-release http://www.kubuntu.org/news/9.04-release ? P.S. FreeBSD and some linuxes don't exactly target the same kinds of users as apple. You know, the typical FreeBSD or Debian user probably cares about which version of gcc is default, and probably couldn't care less about photo editing software. Their PR seems adequate to me :D

whughes 17y ago
No, I don't think those measure up. The Ubuntu listing is too short and too non-specific to be much good. They also overuse acronyms and pack them too densely (PSP, MP3..). The Kubuntu listing is better than the Ubuntu page, but still not there. There's overuse of bullet points, which limit detail. Everything is generally too terse and badly-organized. They rely on prior knowledge and don't explain what the improvements mean to the users. What is this? "The new plasma-widget-network-manager replaces the old KNetworkManager applet." What does that mean to me, a new Kubuntu user? Apple does it better. They have nice delineation of features, so you don't have to go looking for information. It's also listed in much more detail, which is the main problem with the OSS lists. Actually, looking at both pages, it seems like the Kubuntu people are doing something fundamentally different. They're listing new versions of software, briefly detailing the changes, and pointing to the software changelogs. Apple is talking about the OS as a whole and dividing it into parts. They're not saying "iChat updated to version X"; they're saying "iChat in Snow Leopard has features Y and Z."
c00p3r 17y ago
FreeBSD team, for example, actually removed "Giant lock" from most important drivers, make memory allocation routines SMP-aware, replace default scheduler and they have been ported their codebase to more than one 64-bit architecture. It is not just recompilation with -m64 flag. But they failed to convince people that they are doing many thing much better as a server OS, and already have all that "innovations", except may be OpenCL.

whughes 17y ago

No, I don't think those measure up. The Ubuntu listing is too short and too non-specific to be much good. They also overuse acronyms and pack them too densely (PSP, MP3..). The Kubuntu listing is better than the Ubuntu page, but still not there. There's overuse of bullet points, which limit detail. Everything is generally too terse and badly-organized. They rely on prior knowledge and don't explain what the improvements mean to the users. What is this? "The new plasma-widget-network-manager replaces the old KNetworkManager applet." What does that mean to me, a new Kubuntu user? Apple does it better. They have nice delineation of features, so you don't have to go looking for information. It's also listed in much more detail, which is the main problem with the OSS lists. Actually, looking at both pages, it seems like the Kubuntu people are doing something fundamentally different. They're listing new versions of software, briefly detailing the changes, and pointing to the software changelogs. Apple is talking about the OS as a whole and dividing it into parts. They're not saying "iChat updated to version X"; they're saying "iChat in Snow Leopard has features Y and Z."

c00p3r 17y ago

FreeBSD team, for example, actually removed "Giant lock" from most important drivers, make memory allocation routines SMP-aware, replace default scheduler and they have been ported their codebase to more than one 64-bit architecture. It is not just recompilation with -m64 flag. But they failed to convince people that they are doing many thing much better as a server OS, and already have all that "innovations", except may be OpenCL.