Vista Forums - View Single Post

07-13-2007

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> 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
>
> Prove they are all lies or STFU!
> Frank

Prove they aren't or STFU!

Alias

07-13-2007	#4 (permalink)
Alias n/a posts	Re: Bad Ubuntu Frank wrote: > Alias wrote: >> 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 > > Prove they are all lies or STFU! > Frank Prove they aren't or STFU! Alias
My System Specs