You're viewing a single thread.
Tbh, I don't really get the hate that Ubuntu gets.
I mean, I do understand that people don't like some of the decisions made with Ubuntu (e.g. snap), but especially for people who don't use an OS for the sake of using that OS and just want to use their PC to get stuff done, Ubuntu/Kubuntu are quite good.
You have a mostly consistent UI that can do most important configs without touching CLI. Manuals and simple guides are easy to find, even in other languages than English (which is important for quite a big number of people outside the US).
And contrary to some other, smaller distros, Ubuntu isn't run by just 1-2 people and you can trust in it still existing in 10 years. (Obviously, this is true for many other distros, but some quite widly used distros are run just by a tiny team of hobbyists)
I mean, I'd get the reaction if someone claimed they are Linux users because they use Android (though with enough knowledge you can also get a full Linux distro running on Android in chroot).
"Use Snaps"
"No" (installs .deb)
"Fuck you, use Snaps"
(The Snap Store is a proprietary closed-source black-box that updates your snaps without asking and every part of this statement was a deliberate planned feature by Canonical)I mentioned this in the comment you answered to. But as I said, this might be an issue for people that use Linux because they really hate anything that isn't GPL, but 97% of the people on this planet care more about whether something is simple to use than what license it uses, as evidenced by the market share of Windows, Android, Chromebooks and Apple products.
Wouldn't it be better to get some of them to use Ubuntu with snaps than to stay on their proprietary platforms, because packet management sucks and conflicts are basically impossible to solve for someone who's not a software developer?
Linus swore that Bitkeeper wouldn't alter the agreement further, like a mad egotistical movie villain.
Canonical is very clearly funneling their userbase towards a Snap-only environment (something that already exists as an option).
As the sole keyholders, and as a for-profit business, what is the next step?Is it to maintain a wealth of options, even when that cuts into profit margins? What about when those options are competing products (think Gnome and KDE back in the Unity days)?
These things just do not make sense from a business perspective, and they will not be necessary once their userbase is locked into the Snap walled garden.As to your point about licenses and market share, default non-options and limited choices aren't compatible with conversations about choice.
How many major distros aren't run by for-profit entities nowadays? If you want any sort of enterprise use, you need to offer a 24/7 live support plan.
I guess the big difference is that Canonical is hoping to make money off the home users too.
The Snap Store is a proprietary closed-source black-box
Every part of the snap store running on your computer is open source.
that updates your snaps without asking
If you don't want your snaps auto-updating, turn auto updates off.
snap --helpI looked into it. You're right.
They implemented the ability to permanently hold all automatic updates.
After five years of debate during which they consistently claimed that the whole point of Snaps is that developers can push whatever, whenever.
I'll just use apt to bypass the snaps...
$ sudo apt install xyz Installing snap for xyz...Okay what the fuck
Too much of the Linux community makes licencing a dumb hill to die. There is very much a happy medium.
Yeah, most people would have held up Unity as an example of that happy medium a couple months ago. All it takes is one dickhead
I think they get hate because Canonical is a commercial entity.
I really don't like that sentiment though. Software development isn't for free just because you slap GPL on it. These devs need to be paid somehow if they are supposed to do more than 3h/week.
You can also see the same thing in the Linux kernel. Many Kernel devs are employed by Microsoft, Google, the NSA and many other commercial entities.
I love the idea of developers getting paid. Let's do more of that.
Total agreement.
And even if you look at it from an egotistical view point: If the devs are unpaid hobbyists, you get unpaid hobbyist quality.
bRo ItS fReE sOfTwArE
Free as in "The people who make it should be doing it for free and I still can removed about them and be the entitled customer as if they were Microsoft"...
Im all for supporting free software developers, I support UBI
Yeah I quit Ubuntu after 12 years but I still recommend it for people trying to change OS ..it's great OS
I have used Kubuntu since 12.04 and had few issues. I get everyone has favorites, but don't understand the visceral tribalism present. Maybe I'll hate Kubuntu when 24.04 comes out, I dunno. I have 20.04 as a daily driver and run into very few issues that are specifically Kubuntu related. I could use debian with KDE someday, I dunno.
I just want Linux, bash, and a decent browser at the end of the day.
Ubuntu is great. I used it for years.
This is going to sound petty, but one thing that annoyed me for years was the ads for their enterprise crap that they put into the terminal whn running updates.
I tried Debian 12 when it came out and I love it. I switched all of my systems to Debian.
I would much rather use a community driven distro than a corporate one.
Also, I applied for a job with Ubuntu The recruiter sent me the most insane take home written interview packet. I took a look at it and decided I didnt want to work with a bunch of people who would fill that packet out.
JuSt UsE dEbIaN
The longest-running distro out there is mostly run by one guy.
OpenSUSE? They have quite a few people working on that. Or did you mean another distro?
Slackware is my guess... Been around since 93 i think
OpenSUSE started as a German translation of Slackware, which is still around today and maintained by Patrick Volkerding.