
Ubuntu should zig to Apple’s zag - ahmicro
http://bytebaker.com/2011/10/19/ubuntu-should-zig-to-apples-zag/
======
div
I don't really understand what the author is trying to say. Granted, it's been
a while since I used Ubuntu, but as a developer I mainly live in my editor and
terminal.

Anything I ever wanted is just an apt-get away and is mostly installed in a
sensible way.

Ubuntu simplifying desktop features and changing defaults to be easier for
users like my mom sounds like a great thing to happen to Linux.

That stuff is mostly orthogonal to developers who, you know, know how to
deviate from the standard configuration and tools.

~~~
gue5t
Ubuntu fails to showcase many of the best aspects of Linux as a system. Linux
(and other open-source OSes, obviously) is an environment in which users are
able to exercise more freedom in their usage of their computers than virtually
anywhere else. Instead of an environment in which "users" are at the mercy of
"developers", the instruction manual is included. Anyone can change their
computer's behavior to the extent of their choosing--and there's nobody to
tell them not to. Ubuntu takes this and ignores it completely, trying instead
to copy user interface features from other projects and environments to win
users that like the idea of cheap software.

Not everyone is a kernel hacker, obviously... but Ubuntu should be proud that
on Linux every user /can/ become one if they so desire. To emphasize the same
read-only one-size-fits-all thinking that Apple has popularized is to
disregard entirely the philosophy of the foundation on which Ubuntu exists.

The argument that Ubuntu is a pragmatic, get-things-done distribution is
founded in fact; it certainly is. But that doesn't mean it has to make it
worse for software development and make it difficult to actually alter your
system in meaningful ways. I ran Ubuntu for over a year and every attempt to
dig into the system's internals (init scripts, configuration tools, what apt
actually /did/, etc.) resulted in frustration because of the great complexity
and the lack of any help that the OS itself provided. Comparing distros like
Arch Linux that guide their users into the system in order to make the changes
they want, Ubuntu is about as read-only as I've ever seen in an open-source
Linux-based system.

Even so, Arch isn't a distro for beginners by any stretch of imagination. And
there I think Ubuntu has the ability to come out far ahead, if they embrace
the fact that they are producing a system designed to be improved by the "end-
users". A Linux distribution is not a product like a commercial software
package. It's an environment that should foster both productivity and
learning. To suggest that users should use a static system or merely accept
their updates in 6-month-increments is like suggesting that a carpenter should
never consider the manufacture of his tools. Sure, there may be a table to
craft today, but improving at the craft of doing so is an important goal--and
Ubuntu should help its users improve in their usage of their systems by
helping them take small, friendly steps into improving the software they use
in real ways.

Stop treating users like children and engage them as equals. Apple can't do
that because they have to keep their users dependent. Ubuntu is missing out on
its greatest source of potential.

~~~
gnaritas
> Linux (and other open-source OSes, obviously) is an environment in which
> users are able to exercise more freedom in their usage of their computers
> than virtually anywhere else.

While this is true, it's simply not a feature the average user wants at all.
They just want it to be simple, and work.

> To suggest that users should use a static system or merely accept their
> updates in 6-month-increments is like suggesting that a carpenter should
> never consider the manufacture of his tools.

Most users aren't carpenters, they have no interest in crafting their own
tools, they just want a decent looking coffee table that doesn't require them
to hand build it.

> Stop treating users like children and engage them as equals.

They aren't equals, have you met most users? You're arguing from a programmers
perspective, not a typical computer users.

~~~
redthrowaway
Who are "most users" here? I've only seen one or two linux distros in the wild
that weren't being used by devs or other power users.

~~~
oblique63
That may be true, but isn't that what Ubuntu is trying to change?

Sure, as a dev/power user I might be annoyed with some of the changes they
make here and there, but as a linux supporter, I'd be much more annoyed if
they weren't actively trying to expand to a broader audience. Regardless of
how they're going about it, I'm just glad they're actually doing _something_
in that area.

------
Zak
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_.

~~~
cookiecaper
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
_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!

~~~
hetman
So the good news is you _can_ move the clock in Gnome 3 Classic. All you have
to do is hold Alt to right click on the widget and move. I mean... that's
completely obvious right?

This has to be one of the worst UI decisions I've ever encountered...

~~~
pyre

      > that's completely obvious right?
    

That's (sort of) how you move the items on the right hand side of Apple's
menubar in OSX. Hold Alt/Option and drag with the left mouse button.

------
sofuture
I think Ubuntu should zag where Apple zags. I think they're doing it right.
They're in a unique position to take an Apple-like path.

I, for one, applaud what they're doing, as much as it terrifies all the half-
power-users (I don't mean that as a slight, I do think it's a little silly to
get upset about Ubuntu's default WM and claim to 'understand UNIX').

~~~
Kell
If by "I don't mean that as a slight, I do think it's a little silly to get
upset about Ubuntu's default WM and claim to 'understand UNIX'" you mean it's
possible for a hacker to change back from Unity to another interface. I must
concur... but dissent on the fact that doing so is easy for a regular geek.
It's not. It may be easy to the people that do ""understand Unix"". But for
myself, I found that it was easier saying it than doing it. Not impossible...
true. However since I'm not a great "hacker" but a mere guy with some
understanding of the terminal, it proved to be a real mess.

~~~
morsch
Huh? You don't need the terminal. You can chose the environment in the login
screen, there's a drop down menu besides your name. Not exactly intuitive, but
very easy to find out using Google or a forum. If you want Gnome 3, you can
install it from the repositories (again, no terminal required, at least not in
11.10), and it'll be there in the drop down menu.

Zero understanding of *nix required here.

~~~
Kell
Yes I was speaking of Gnome3. And No. It's not only "Install it from the
repositories". Maybe it worked easily for you.. but for me t'was horrible. And
yeah, I ended up having to mess around in the terminal and lynx to solve the
problem (I had no other computer and was not going to always reboot to windows
to Google something while tidying everything up). But yeah you can always say
that's because I'm a noob, and was unable to do it right... but that's exactly
the problem. A "newbie" should not have that kind of problem.

~~~
morsch
Sorry then. I guess it's only foolproof when it actually works#. My own
upgrade experience wasn't for the faint of heart. I hope it was a learning
experience, at least; it usually is for me. ;)

Beginners shouldn't have this kind of problem; but put another way, beginners
shouldn't mess with this stuff unless they're willing to have this kind of
problem (I'm sure most of us have been there, willingly).

# I'm not sure Ubuntu is particularly bad in this regard. It seems to be
universal among all the operating systems (and everything else, for that
matter). But I guess Linux is more likely to drop you to a shell, which might
be scary for beginners.

------
methodin
I really don't agree with this sentiment at all. There are infinite Linux
distros out there to play with that are more inline with power users. Ubuntu
is for a completely different crowd so what would be the point of just merging
into that nexus? The world doesn't need another power-user Linux distro. It
needs a Linux distro that isn't painful to use for the regular people.

~~~
Peaker
My dad is not a power user -- and he had liked Ubuntu, until the Unity
interface.

~~~
ricardobeat
Because people don't like change. I bet he'd hate going from Windows 3.1 to 95
too.

~~~
Peaker
That might be the case, but given that Unity is inferior to the previous
desktop in so many ways, it might also be that.

------
notatoad
building a UI for developers is impossible, because every developer wants
something totally different. it's also pointless because every developer
_will_ customize their environment to make it work for them.

you can't please all the people all the time. at some point you have to make a
decision that some use cases can't be supported, for the sake of progress. in
those cases, i think dropping support for the people who need support the
least is the only logical way to go.

personally, i use ubuntu (and unity too!) every day as my primary development
machine (python programming and database admin), and when i come home i have
it on my primary play machine too. it does what it needs to do if you are
willing to adjust your workflow a little bit. and if you aren't willing to
adjust your workflow at all, ever, then maybe preconfigured DEs are not for
you.

~~~
Peaker
I am willing to adjust my workflow, I am not willing to use alpha-quality
software.

------
lsc
eh, personally, I also hate unity. I am a linux SysAdmin, so if I want to go
muck around in the internals or install and configure my own window manager,
sure, I can. But that's not why I use ubuntu on the desktop. I use ubuntu on
the desktop because it just works. If I want to tinker with Linux, I can do it
on a server and get paid for it. With older versions of ubuntu? heck, getting
drivers is usually easier than with windows. Most things? plug and go, no
downloading a driver from a third party website or anything. You plug it in
and it just works. (Some things require more work. Those things get taken back
to Fry's. Again, desktops are low-value. I'm not going to spend too much time
messing with them.)

The problem is that unity is, well, it's garbage. If I wanted a mac, I'd buy a
mac. I liked the old gnome defaults; they were pretty good. Right now? I'm on
ubuntu 11.10, and I'm considering another distro.

Unity is simply unusable; It's annoying for all the reasons that the mac
interface is annoying, only the whole thing is done, well, worse. Just finding
a program is a huge pain in the ass. So I'm running gnome-legacy, which is
okay, but still pretty annoying compared to older ubuntu versions.

So yeah; I'm pretty irritated. Not irritated enough to buy a mac, mind you,
but likely irritated enough to spend some time looking at other distros, if
I'm going to have to spend effort on my X setup, I'm going with a distro that
is supported for more than three years.

~~~
skystorm
I was in the same boat and ended up switching to Xubuntu -- and I don't regret
it for one second. I get all the good stuff ("just works") with a sleek,
customizable UI, that also happens to be very frugal wrt. system resources.
It's a win-win really. :)

~~~
gmt2027
After the last upgrade, I've been forced to abandon Unity and Gnome3 for
Xmonad. I'm seriously considering another distro like ArchLinux. Xubuntu may
just be the solution - for now anyway.

------
LVB
_...and let’s be honest, there’s an iPad market, not a tablet market._

Please, phrase, go away. You're not profound anymore.

------
vacri
If people want a different linux experience to Ubuntu's offering, they're in
luck, there are hundreds: <http://distrowatch.com/>

Ubuntu has specifically stated that they're aiming for the layperson, not the
power user. If you cut your teeth on ubuntu and want more power in your linux
box... try out another distro.

~~~
jiggy2011
The problem is: Even power users usually want consistency and ease of use.

The main advantage of Ubuntu is that it is the best supported Linux distro out
there when it comes to software.

For allot of desktop centric software , supporting Linux basically means
supporting Ubuntu and possibly fedora.

Nobody wants to mess with source tarballs just to install the latest video
player.

I'm a developer but I still want the option to be a "dumb user" allot of the
time when I'm doing tasks like using the web / playing music etc.

~~~
wes-exp
This. At least with Ubuntu, there is a large enough user base that there is
software available for it that is tested and actually works (conveniently
available as a binary .deb).

Also, bugs tend to be identified and fixed, again due to the size of the
community. If you run into a problem, often times there is already a forum
post somewhere with a solution.

If developers are to use an obscure "power user" distribution, it throws out
all the benefits of community.

Perhaps what's needed is a "Devbuntu" that relies on most of the same
components as Ubuntu, but targets power users.

~~~
vacri
Obscure distributions? Source tarballs? What are you two on about?

Debian, Ubuntu's daddy, is the creator of the apt system. You'd be insane to
say it's not a distribution for power users. Then there's other major distros
with large user bases. Don't blame Ubuntu if you've never looked beyond its
borders.

 _Perhaps what's needed is a "Devbuntu" that relies on most of the same
components as Ubuntu, but targets power users._

Just use Debian.

~~~
jiggy2011
I've used debian for years. I hate that it makes you choose between
stable/testing/unstable.

Whenever I install I always start with stable , because who wouldn't want
"stable" right?

The I realise all the software is hopelessly out of date so I slowly end up
creeping forward to testing or unstable, that's when problems begin.

At least Ubuntu fixed this somewhat with 6 month releases and LTS.

------
phzbOx
For me, Ubuntu has always been the "Linux for newbies" a little bit like
Mandrake was in the time. I'm not saying that all Ubuntu users _are_ newbies..
but Ubuntu is the distro to starts with if you're a beginner. Lots of my
university friend who had no knowledge of Linux would get up and running with
Ubunty in minutes. (A live cd, tool to help create partitions, [next], [next],
automatically configure network). I mean, a Windows user would almost feel at
home on Ubuntu.

Soooo, I find it weird that the author complains about Ubuntu saying it's not
the right direction. We all know there are dozen of distributions and dozen of
window managers. By all means, if you don't like the new updates, just take a
WM more lightweight (For instance, fluxbox, awesome, stumpwm, xmonad, etc.) As
for the distro, I'm using ArchLinux for a couple of years and I'm loving it.

It's not that I _don't like_ beautiful intuitive UI; it's just that it's not
for me (At least on my computers). However, I've got an iPhone and I love the
fact that _everything just work_. But please, don't force me to use GUI
everywhere on my desktop; let that for people who enjoys the _everything just
work_.

But then, maybe I'm wrong. I assumed that Ubuntu always was axed for
beginners.. Was I wrong with that assumption?

------
Cieplak
This is somehow reminiscent of Sun Tzu's _Art of War_.

My interpretation of the article: it would be more prudent to compete with
Apple's weaknesses (developer friendliness) than to compete with their
strengths (UI, zero configuration).

~~~
gbog
Apple's main weakness is Microsoft.

------
ceol
I think the author misses various ways that OS X has been developer friendly.
Last I checked, Xcode is free, and OS X ships with Python, PHP, Ruby, and
Apache.

Plus, as div said, developers live mostly in the terminal, so there isn't much
that Canonical can do to cater to us. I'd rather have everything hidden from
the end user but easily available to the power user via the command line.

------
rhizome31
> Apple [...] things that just work for most people irrespective of prior
> computer usage.

I've spent way to many hours helping fellow developers, friends and relatives
to debug their Apple. Apple does _not_ make things that just work irrespective
of prior computer usage. People get totally lost with Apple just as they do
with other environments and that is indeed irrespective of prior computer
knowledge, which means so-called developers also get lost (MySQL-python
anyone? Or maybe you'd rather have another slice of RMagick?)

------
TiberiusJones
The amount of "Power users shouldn't use Ubuntu" comments on here are fairly
indicative of why those outside the power user/dev community view us the way
they do. It's just elitist whining at the end of the day. Who the hell are
"we" to decide what people should and shouldn't use based on their ability?
It's just this sort of thing that turns the lay person away from wanting to
know more.

Fact of the matter is, if you don't like Unity don't bloody use it. I've never
found a single thing I couldn't do in Ubuntu that would force me over to
another distro. I mean sure, we could all build our own Gentoo installs from
the ground up but who the hell has that sort of time on their hands?

To indicate that Ubuntu is inherently a newbie only system because of eye
candy smacks of both arrogance and a complete lack of understanding. It's like
calling a mansion a shack because you don't like the colour of the window
frames.

------
hippich
Unix power user, huh?..

If you are unix power user - you should not care much about default desktop.
You should customize it right away from the moment you installed _any_ distro
to fit your needs.

Ubuntu do a great job of turning more people into _nix environment. And it is
good for you and for_ nix developers.

~~~
va_coder
Ctl-Shift-T is the start of my session, regardless of UI

~~~
vacri
F12 can work the same way - check out guake. I both like and dislike it, but
it works for friends of mine.

------
comex
> Ubuntu can easily ship with a default arsenal of programming tools. Last I
> checked the default install already includes Python.

As does OS X's, in addition to Perl, Ruby, PHP...

------
achiang
“[Our] goal is 200 million users of Ubuntu in 4 years. We’re not playing a
game for developers hearts and minds – we’re playing a game for the worlds
hearts and minds. and to achieve that we’re going to have to play by a new set
of rules.”

[http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/05/mark-shuttleworth-
deliver...](http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/05/mark-shuttleworth-delivers-uds-
keynote-address-sets-goal-for-200-million-ubuntu-users-in-4-years/)

Also, re: screensavers -- upstream GNOME removed that ability, and Ubuntu
inherited the behavior. From what I understand, we're putting it back.

[canonical employee, speaking on my own behalf]

------
trimbo
_A generation of hackers may have started with BASIC on Apple IIs, but getting
a C compiler on a modern Mac is a 4GB XCode download_

The size of Xcode annoys me too, since I never use it. So I've been using this
GCC install on my Mac: <https://github.com/kennethreitz/osx-gcc-installer>

Couple hundred megabytes. It's still a lot larger than Orca/C was on my Apple
IIgs (1 or 2 3.5" floppies?), but then again, compilers come with a lot of
libraries these days.

~~~
scott_s
Does it bother you for rational or irrational reasons? It bothers me for
irrational reasons - it _feels_ like it's too much, but really, I'm using
about 65 GB of a 500 GB disk. So I tell myself to ignore that feeling and just
install Xcode because it's the most efficient means of getting developer tools
on my Mac.

~~~
trimbo
Rational. I only have a 120GB SSD. At the moment I'm not even able to keep any
music on it, it's so filled up with work stuff.

------
ricardobeat
I think he has no idea what he's talking about. Being user-friendly doesn't
mean abandoning developers or locking up the platform. He's just another
"power user" upset because his old tricks are no longer useful.

~~~
phamilton
The old tricks don't need to go away. Tricks should work across all
distributions. Especially across Debian based distributions.

------
jsz0
What percentage of users are developers? 5 percent? Lower? It's unwise to
cater the entire OS to the needs of such a small minority especially when they
are the best suited to change the environment to meet their needs. Complaining
about needing to download Xcode is a perfect example of why it is wrong. If
it's bundled into the OS you're wasting 4GB of space on tens of millions of
machines to save the 5% a 4GB download. That makes no sense.

The big problem with Ubutunu is still that it is, no matter how much nicer
they make it look, a collection of inconsistently designed user interfaces for
mediocre clones of better applications on other platforms. It has no soul. It
just stumbles forward feebly copying whatever else happens to be popular on
other platforms. It's always going to be playing catch-up to ever moving goal
posts. Unless you have some religious zeal to use OSS software there is no
good reason to even consider Ubuntu over Windows or OSX.

~~~
nsomaru
I think the point was that it should not be a 4GB download to get a
C-compiler.

Your point makes sense if you accept a 4GB download just for a compiler.

There are many Linux distro's that come with a C-compiler which are less than
4GB in total size.

~~~
analyk
I think your view of the 4GB download is going to depend on your Internet
speed. At 1 MB/s or so, I've found it annoying to wait an hour for a download,
but it's hardly the end of the world for an occasional thing. Could definitely
be improved.

------
freshhawk
I agree wholeheartedly with his take on this halfassed push towards poorly
designed minimalism masquerading as user friendliness but I disagree that
ubuntu should be some kind of developers distribution, that's never what
Ubuntu was supposed to be. It's entire purpose is to be a novice distribution.

Power users should not be using it, it's not built for them.

------
tuananh
They go for the 99%. _majority_ aren't _power user_ so if they make it simple,
more people would jump on the boat

~~~
jiggy2011
Making the Linux desktop simpler requires much more than changing the UI. More
reliable drivers for common hardware and availability of good, simple software
for tasks like video/photo/music editing are way more important.

------
RK
I think part of Shuttleworth's philosophy is that he wants Ubuntu to be(come)
an OS that the rest of the world can use, not just the traditional Linux power
users, but even the emerging computer markets that may not be able to afford
the latest and greatest hardware with a proprietary OS.

~~~
jiggy2011
Emerging markets pherhaps, although I think that most of these just use
pirated Windows already.

The problem is that it isn't "an OS the rest of the world can use" for issues
not related to the UI.

Simply saying "It's like Mac/Windows but uglier with less software and more
issues" isn't a compelling sales pitch to anybody.

------
cageface
_A generation of hackers may have started with BASIC on Apple IIs, but getting
a C compiler on a modern Mac is a 4GB XCode download._

A hefty download, perhaps, but free and once it's installed you have a good,
modern, IDE with extensive documentation and perhaps the richest and most
mature UI toolkit there is to play with. Getting something into the app store
for sale may require crossing more speed bumps than necessary but if you want
to learn systems or UI hacking it's far easier on a Mac now than it was on an
Apple II.

Ubuntu may have taken this simplification strategy too far but catering
primarily to the power user and developer is what earned Linux its minuscule
market share in the first place.

------
2muchcoffeeman
Surely the author should just pick a different distro? Why is this Canonical's
problem? Isn't this sorta the whole point of Linux? If you don't like
something there is seemingly infinite choice so you can always have what you
want.

------
magnethy
I haven't used Linux as a primary desktop OS for almost 7 years, so I figured
I'd give it a go - so I got a ThinkPad W520 running Ubuntu 11.10 for work
(software development.) Verdict so far? Next time I'm going for a Mac again.

Why?

* X doesn't automatically set up my nvidia graphics card. Sure, I can manually install the driver and set up Xorg.conf, but I just don't want to do that. Luckily there's also an integrated Intel graphics card.¨

* VGA port does not work (no presentations using the projector for me) because of previous point.

* The wireless keeps freezing. At least 10 times a day I have to (using the physical switch on the side of the laptop) turn off the wireless card and turn it on again. Wow. This also is something I'm sure can be fixed by jumbling around with drivers, but again - I just don't want to do that.

* Gnome is horrible. I might be spoiled (lets face it: I AM spoiled) by Apple and their 'everything just works' - which it pretty much does as far as UI goes. Currently I'm running Xfce, which I found to be pleasantly simple. I found Gnome to be buggy and annyoing. Just like in the old days.

Of course there are a lot of positives, like apt being great (my main reason
for the switch), and all the available GNU/Linux tools. As others have pointed
out, if you use the terminal a lot it's great - but that goes for pretty much
any distro.

As far as Ubuntu goes I totally agree with OP. It just doesn't cut it. It's
supposed to bring Linux to the people, isn't it? Well, it's not doing a good
job of that. I installed Ubuntu to have a system that just works. It doesn't.

If Apple were to bring in a customizable packaging system like apt it'd be a
dangerously perfect match. Don't see that happening though.

~~~
Xixi
MacPorts is a pretty good packaging system, though as its name imply more like
ports than aptitude. Since it's hosted on Mac OS Forge, you could say it's the
"official" Apple packaging system.

As far as I am concerned it fits the bill, I rarely encounter anything broken
(except during the Leopard / Snow Leopard transition that was quite a
nightmare).

That said having to compile everything sometimes is annoying...

------
daedalus_j
While I'm 100% behind this, no questions asked, couldn't have said it better
myself, Canonical has one huge disadvantage going for them if they were to try
and create the best damn development platform out there: Hardware.

I do agree though, and I do hope Canonical takes this advice and succeeds at
it. They're possibly one of the only groups both big enough and organized
enough to pull it off and do it well.

------
barumrho
Do a lot of developers use Ubuntu nowadays?

When Ubuntu first came along, I was a Linux user, and I tried Ubuntu on a few
different occasions, but I never liked it mostly for the same reasons why
people seem to be complaining. It just felt like eye candies tacked onto
Debian. There are many other good distributions that are geared toward power
users. Why are so many complaining?

~~~
vidarh
Well, as a developer I got over wanting to tune everything about 10 years ago.
I want things to mostly just work, and Ubuntu does that for the most part.

I've yet to run into any situation where using Ubuntu has constrained me in
any way vs. using another Linux distribution (and I've used a bunch of
different ones over the years).

~~~
dfc
What does not mostly work from a vanilla debioan install?

~~~
vidarh
The main reason I use Ubuntu over vanilla Debian for my desktop is lack of
polish. It's not that I can't use it, but Ubuntu adds more polish, and what it
takes away is stuff I don't notice because I don't tweak my desktop or laptop
much anymore.

For the most part my "tweaks" consists of a git repo of my dot-files, and I
rarely run more than a couple of full screen browser windows and a bunch of
full screened terminal windows.

------
aufreak3
Designing for non-power versus power users is a false dichotomy. If it were a
true one, developers won't be swarming to macbook pros.

------
cmars232
I've simply come to accept that Unity is not for 'us', in the way that ipad is
not for 'us'. I install xubuntu instead.

------
jroseattle
Maybe Canonical is trying to sell software and services, and needs a better UI
in order to compete? While I echo the sentiments of the author, I'm guessing
that Canonical is knowingly pursuing a certain market. A certain market that
exceeds the Linux power-user/developer market in size.

------
jebblue
I've been complaining about Unity since 11.04. The only worthwhile improvement
in 11.10 is that Dasher is no longer ugly solid black. Well, the menu in the
upper right has some sensible options now. They took away screensavers, like
it's up to Canonical to make the world green? I never used them on my systems
on a full time basis but it was nice to take a break sometimes and play with
them. I can't change fonts now, even my wife who is a non-technical user said,
"the new fonts are terrible why can't I change them?".

I'm going to try out KDE for a while, it's heavy or it used to be, Gnome 2 was
just right. I've tried XFCE and it feels like an older Gnome (which isn't a
bad thing), down the road it might be the better option until they get a wild
hair and go nutts too.

------
drdaeman
I believe, the problem is, various implementations of the same subsystems do
not cooperate well (if they even cooperate at all). For example,
NetworkManager does not cooperate with /etc/network/* or /etc/ppp/* or
wpa_supplicant — it either steps away and does nothing or uses its own
configuration (stored in completely separate manner). Sure, some approaches
work (say, NM calls pppd, thus /etc/ppp/options have some effect), while some
don't (good luck teaching NM to run PPPoE over 802.11 bridge).

This leads to a problem that one just can't have easily co-existing multiple
approaches to work and configuration (i.e. "Ubuntu newbie" vs "seasoned
GNU/Linux guru" ways). You have either one or another, and switching between
is a pain.

------
ashishgandhi
> Given the growing lockdown of Apple’s systems

I see that kind of stuff said from time to time. But I don't quite understand.
How is it growing?

And people talk about it (App Store) as if it's terribly evil of Apple but
it's okay when it gets done on say a Xbox.

~~~
Groxx
I came to say that too. If anything, it keeps _decreasing_ \- the first app-
capable iOS devices had no app store, and the barrier to entry for programming
on either system keeps dropping (the SDKs and even the IDEs are free, for
instance). The only claim I can see is the emergence of the OSX App Store -
big shocker there, given the success on iOS - but that hasn't resulted in a
lockdown of regular installs, and I doubt it will.

As to the XCode-is-required claim, that's been false for a very long time -
their GCC is open source, and has been for years. It has only recently become
_easy_ though, I'll grant that.

~~~
ootachi
Many reasons:

Apple clearly sees iOS and its locked-down environment as the future and Mac
OS X as the past. Given that, we can conclude that the overall openness of
Apple's offerings will decrease as they focus their efforts on iOS.

Xcode is for-pay now, while it was free earlier.

Apple keeps breaking SIMBL.

Debuggers now need to be signed by Apple or self-signed; either way, it's a
pain.

QuickTime X is no longer extensible via plugins.

~~~
sbuk
>> _Xcode is for-pay now, while it was free earlier._

It's back to being free if you have installed Lion.

>> _Apple keeps breaking SIMBL._

SIMBL is a non-standard 3rd party framework. It would be more correct to say
that SIMBL isn't keeping up with OS X development.

------
jhuni
I would go about making Ubuntu into a development environment through the web.
There are various points in the browsing experience when a visual HTML editor
could be useful, then in the visual HTML editor, touching an element could
drop you down into JavaScript to add events. In the same manner, more complex
constructs could be progressively introduced to the user.

Furthermore, I personally use versions of Android on my tablets and Ubuntu on
my desktops. I see no reason that Ubuntu should "make a dent in the tablet
market" when Android is already doing fine for us.

------
devmach
I think, the problems with the Ubuntu are :

1- They think users are plan stupid so they have to decide what's good for
users.

2- They're just copying from Apple, don't think about why apple did like that.
This will end up with a mess. When i use my friend's mac, i think "this thing
can't be better" and then when i use ubuntu with unity all i can think is
"What the f __k they were thinking ?"

~~~
vacri
In response to 2), I use a friends mac and think "wtf were they thinking"
quite often. Default browser can't fullscreen/kiosk mode? Resize from only one
corner, not any border? Heavy reliance on keystrokes with low discoverability?

Apple makes a nice bit of kit, but please, can we stop with pretending they've
got it perfect?

~~~
eropple
_Default browser can't fullscreen/kiosk mode? Resize from only one corner, not
any border?_

Neither is true in 10.7.

 _Heavy reliance on keystrokes with low discoverability?_

For the most part, keystrokes follow similar patterns from application to
application. There are inconsistencies (some applications use ctrl-tab to
switch tabs, some use ctrl-pgup/pgdn) but for the most part it's self-
consistent. (There are some nice power user tweaks, such as a subset of Emacs
keystrokes available for navigation in text boxes, but they're not critical.)

~~~
vacri
I haven't used 10.7, but still, that those things were ommitted for so long is
straight-out bizarre.

~~~
sbuk
It depends where you are coming from I suppose. Kiosk mode until recently
didn't really fit in with the Mac (going way back to System 1.0 days) work
flow, but when Apple integrated multiple desktop into OS X, it shifted the
workflow enough to allow for kiosked windows to inhabit their own 'space'.
It's worth checking out as it's quite an elegant solution. I, and I think the
vast majority of Mac users would agree on the resizing point and thankfully it
has been addressed, but it's worth remembering that the original idea behind
one location to resize windows was overall simplicity. Whether or not
simplicity was achieved however is an entirely different thing, and I imagine
that we'd agree that it wasn't! WRT to short cut keys, they have always be
displayed in the menu. Since the menu bar is the primary way that many
functions are initially accessed, the idea is that eventually the users will
learn them through exposure, which in fact is exactly the same way that most
desktop UI educate users. The Wiki entry on the command key make for
"intersting" (well, to us geeks mainly!) reading.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_key#The_origin_of_.22.E...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_key#The_origin_of_.22.E2.8C.98.22)

------
dfc
I never thought of Ubuntu as a power user distro. I always thought Debian was
for power users and Ubuntu was the gateway drug...

------
EGreg
Why encourage users to be developers at the EXPENSE of things that "just
work"?

When I think of a Linux I should install just to get things done, I think of
Ubuntu. The more it positions itself that way, the more it will get users. The
GPL and free software culture should take care of the rest. It is the
responsibility of developers to build an ecosystem for themselves, because
they know how to do it.

Don't you guys see this is why Linux's marketshare has been so small for now?
If you don't like Ubuntu, by the way, there are always other Linux distros.
You're welcome to install Slackware. On my server, I run CentOS. Why can't
there be ONE linux distro that regular people can use without reading a
manual?

------
dfc
If you swap gnome for ubuntu and gnome3 for Unity you have a brand new story.
Part of me sort of blames Ubuntu or Ubuntu's influence for the terrible
direction of Gnome in general.

~~~
hetman
Could you expand on that? I was always under the impression their paths just
happened to coincide given Canonical didn't have enough sway to make them
adopt their own vision.

~~~
dfc
No its just a hunch/intuition and me being bitter.

------
joejohnson
I agree completely. I've had many of these same thoughts myself when using
Ubuntu.

------
jiggy2011
Unity is all about re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic.

The relative failure of Linux as a traditional desktop platform has very
little to do with the UI. Sure Gnome 2 looks clunky and outdated now but it's
basically a Win2000/XP Clone as far as UI is concerned (startmenu + taskbar +
quicklaunch). So it will have been familiar enough to most users who come from
a windows background (who are going to be the ones most wanting to try it).
The UI is the not _big_ issue here...

The problems with the Linux desktop for "normal users" (whoever they are) are
and always have been:

Lack of ports of popular commercial software for many tasks and in many (not
all) cases a lack of a "good enough" open source alternative.

Lack of reliable support for many consumer hardware configurations that are
bundled with cheap desktops (nvidia/ATI support still isn't 100% for example),
also on some netbooks you install ubuntu and the Fn + F(Key) combinations
don't work unless you know to install a specific package. Also support for
niche hardware for some tasks is hit/miss.

Weird intermittent issues that some people experience with power saving ,
wireless , flash etc..

No amount of changing the dock/menubar will fix _any_ of these issues.

Let's face it , default unity is _ugly_.. it makes windows 7 look gorgeous by
comparison but this has pretty much always been the way with Gnome/KDE. For
many users (like me) the customisation aspect has been more than enough to
make up for this however, unity pretty much kills that.

The only reasons I can think to advise anybody to run a linux desktop are:

You really care about OSS ideals and will not use any non-free software (in
which case you want debian not ubuntu).

You are super paranoid and want something secure to install in a VM for using
online banking etc.

You want a second OS so that you can diagnose more easily whether something is
a hardware/software problem.

You develop software that will run on a Linux server so want a desktop
environment that is as close to production as possible (this is me and
probably most serious workplace Linux users)

Your a geek and like playing with different OSes

If somebody genuinely only wants to run facebook/youtube etc then pretty much
any OS out there will suit their needs, in which case they will want to move
over to something closer to iOS / Android rather than some half baked unity.

Even Microsoft have acknologed that you can't really easily build a UI that
will work for the casual tablet / netbook user and the "content
creator"/business user hence the seperation of metro and the standard Windows
UI. I have almost 0 faith in canonical succeeding here.

Building a super simple UI on top of Linux should be left to the likes of
Google/HTC, with commercial OSes being increasingly locked down a space is
opening for a serious "power user" system with high customisability, this is
where Ubuntu could win big.

Of course people will say to me "oh your not the target market , use another
distro" Well there are a few problems with this argument:

The reason I use Ubuntu is because it is the closest thing the Linux desktop
has to a defacto standard setup. Anybody who cares about distributing Linux
applications will make sure they work with ubuntu and usually provide a tested
.deb or an apt repo. If I switch distro there is a fair chance I lose this and
end up back with source tarballs and weird install scripts. I spent a large
part of the last 10 years trying different distros and this has consistently
been the worst part of the experience.

Just because I am a power user does not mean I don't want my applications to
"just work" and be installable through a standard simple interface, Ubuntu
does this very very well (for the most part).

I think the whole idea of having different distros for novices and advanced
users pretty idiotic really, a good distro should install with sensible
defaults that "just work" and allow anybody who wants to customise to a
greater or lesser degree. Many developers and other advanced users seem to
have no problem customising the "beginner friendly" mac OS for their needs.

I could go on , but I think I'll leave it there :)

------
jfricker
Conservatives expressing concerns are almost always a turn off.

------
DannoHung
Respectfully, eat a dick. Just... no. If you know what you're doing with
Linux, Ubuntu is the wrong distro for you to start with.

