Vista Forums - View Single Post

07-13-2007

NOT Alias - Thank GOD wrote:
> Ubuntu is often hailed as the future for the GNU/Linux desktop and even
> for the server. This page is dedicated to exploring the downsides to
> Ubuntu.
>
> No established release policy
> Once concerned with a production-ready release every 6 months, Ubuntu
> have now decided that some releases will be "LTS" - long term supported.
> It's hard to depend on a distribution with no set release policy.
>
> You don't get the whole of Debian
> Whilst the core packages are supported, this is only a few hundred of
> the 20,000 available in the Debian repositories. The rest are not
> guaranteed to work, and indeed many don't.
>
> Jumping the gun
> You get a very hot off the press Gnome and Evolution suite with Ubuntu,
> even in the LTS version. There are bugs that don't get fixed on the
> first Gnome and Evolution major releases. You know the score, 2.00 some
> bugs, 2.01 getting better, 2.02 finally fixed. But with Ubuntu you get
> the 2.00 release for it's cutting edge package. These don't get fixed up
> even in the LTS releases.
>
> Easy installer or working installer
> The installer for Ubuntu is in a state that most projects would consider
> experimental. Your mileage may vary.
>
> Non-Free
> Ubuntu have been toying with the idea of including non-free software.
> Whilst other distributions like Debian do this, they have a very clear
> cut policy of not having such software on their installers, and making
> the non-free repositories a separate choice inclusion. There is no such
> division in Ubuntu repositories.
>
> Lack of Multimedia
> So, you may be lumbered non-free stuff you don't want, but when it comes
> to getting multimedia codecs (including those openly licensed but patent
> encumbered in some countries), Ubuntu is not so well supported as
> Debian. The repositories at http://debian-multimedia.org are a one stop
> shop for Debian multimedia, but don't support Ubuntu.
>
>

All lies.

Alias

07-13-2007	#2 (permalink)
Alias n/a posts	Re: Bad Ubuntu NOT Alias - Thank GOD wrote: > Ubuntu is often hailed as the future for the GNU/Linux desktop and even > for the server. This page is dedicated to exploring the downsides to > Ubuntu. > > No established release policy > Once concerned with a production-ready release every 6 months, Ubuntu > have now decided that some releases will be "LTS" - long term supported. > It's hard to depend on a distribution with no set release policy. > > You don't get the whole of Debian > Whilst the core packages are supported, this is only a few hundred of > the 20,000 available in the Debian repositories. The rest are not > guaranteed to work, and indeed many don't. > > Jumping the gun > You get a very hot off the press Gnome and Evolution suite with Ubuntu, > even in the LTS version. There are bugs that don't get fixed on the > first Gnome and Evolution major releases. You know the score, 2.00 some > bugs, 2.01 getting better, 2.02 finally fixed. But with Ubuntu you get > the 2.00 release for it's cutting edge package. These don't get fixed up > even in the LTS releases. > > Easy installer or working installer > The installer for Ubuntu is in a state that most projects would consider > experimental. Your mileage may vary. > > Non-Free > Ubuntu have been toying with the idea of including non-free software. > Whilst other distributions like Debian do this, they have a very clear > cut policy of not having such software on their installers, and making > the non-free repositories a separate choice inclusion. There is no such > division in Ubuntu repositories. > > Lack of Multimedia > So, you may be lumbered non-free stuff you don't want, but when it comes > to getting multimedia codecs (including those openly licensed but patent > encumbered in some countries), Ubuntu is not so well supported as > Debian. The repositories at http://debian-multimedia.org are a one stop > shop for Debian multimedia, but don't support Ubuntu. > > All lies. Alias
My System Specs