- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
What is happening in the world of Ubuntu?
|
|
|
Comments (35)
15 earlier comments in the full thread.
Good lord, did you complainers actually read the article? No. You stopped as soon as you found something you could whine about. You don't have a basis to complain, and you're too stubborn to admit you're wrong. That does way more damage than the alleged offense you're whining about. Shades of the KDE4 lynch mob- oh yeah, TA was there too, acting like you were being deprived of an entitlement.
Garymax, it seems you're falling into the same trap of fixating on the wrong thing as well, and escalating a minor comment way beyond its importance. Yes, it would be nice if every Linux howto could include everything about Linux in under 1000 words. It doesn't work that way. If it's that big a deal, why not post a polite helpful comment? Instead of attacking this article like it came from the Microsoft PR machine. Linux: we don't need enemies, we have our friends!
Garymax, it seems you're falling into the same trap of fixating on the wrong thing as well, and escalating a minor comment way beyond its importance. Yes, it would be nice if every Linux howto could include everything about Linux in under 1000 words. It doesn't work that way. If it's that big a deal, why not post a polite helpful comment? Instead of attacking this article like it came from the Microsoft PR machine. Linux: we don't need enemies, we have our friends!
I have to agree with TC. I don't see anything problematic or misleading in this article. It's an article about Ubuntu, nothing more, nothing less. It was well-written and would be informative for almost anyone curious about Ubuntu. I also agree with the suggestion above that it would be nice to have similar articles about all major distros; I know a lot more about the Ubuntu development process than that of any other distro.
Quoting:f those penning these blogs and articles would take the time to accurately explain the basic concepts of Linux ... not only would this be more accurate, ...
True, but how many newbies* would take the time to read it?
* and others
Quoting:Mandriva Gnu/Linux is not an operating System, it's a Distribution.TA I understand your point, but I'm afraid that to the average bloke it's going to seem like tedious hair splitting and his eyes would glaze over.
You've got to talk to these punters in terms they are familiar with, and that's just how the referenced article tackles it.
I write in such a way that:
distribution = operating system
and I do it all the time (yeah, yeah).
It's a wonder I haven't been called out before now.
distribution = operating system
and I do it all the time (yeah, yeah).
It's a wonder I haven't been called out before now.
Tuxchick
I didn't fall into any trap. Go back and read my post. I said that YOU and tracyanne were BOTH right!
I understand both sides. I only added that it would be helpful if the articles did mention the actual make-up of Linux so that those new to Linux would understand not only the system they're using, but their options as well when it comes to other distributions.
That is the only point that I was making. Relax.
OK...here goes:
To those who read forums and journals... A distro is more than a kernel... With Linux at its base, and GNU tools on its face... Together they will live on eternal...
How's that, Tuxchick?
I didn't fall into any trap. Go back and read my post. I said that YOU and tracyanne were BOTH right!
I understand both sides. I only added that it would be helpful if the articles did mention the actual make-up of Linux so that those new to Linux would understand not only the system they're using, but their options as well when it comes to other distributions.
That is the only point that I was making. Relax.
Quoting:If it's that big a deal, why not post a polite helpful comment?
OK...here goes:
To those who read forums and journals... A distro is more than a kernel... With Linux at its base, and GNU tools on its face... Together they will live on eternal...
How's that, Tuxchick?
Quoting:tracyanne in the technical sense of the word you are right. But most of the people I talk to think that the Kernel+Userland Tools+GUI+Supplimental apps (calculator, card games, a paint program, everything else that comes on the computer when they buy it) are the Operating System.
What they think is irrelevent. They are still wrong.
Quoting:Good lord, did you complainers actually read the article?
From begining to end.
Quoting:TA I understand your point, but I'm afraid that to the average bloke it's going to seem like tedious hair splitting and his eyes would glaze over.
I set up Linux based computers for people way less technically literate than the people the blokes article is aimed at, they would go near a itwire or any other computer oriented webpage, and they have no trouble understanding that Ubuntu, Mandriva, SuSE, Red Hat etc are Distributuions of Gnu/Linux. They are certainly what I would call the average Bloke and Blokette.
Quoting: What they think is irrelevent. They are still wrong.
That is true but people are also lazy and rather than say "I'll go search the web for that information" they say "I'll google it." So when you have something to say you can use appropriate terms, which your chosen audience may understand, or you can use the jargon that your chosen audience will understand.
I think it would be better if we all called everything by it's appropriate name, but I only occasionally comment on some web forums, and don't write articles so my opinion doesn't have much reach.
When you are in the position of educating people, which the author claims he is. Then you use correct terminology, and you disseminate the correct information, you leave it up to your audience to be lazy.
Just because most people can't multiply 7 by 7 and get 49 is no reason to tell them it's 48, just because most people think it is.
Just because most people can't multiply 7 by 7 and get 49 is no reason to tell them it's 48, just because most people think it is.
tracyanne
Excellent point.
If the author claims to be educating people then he has an obligation to educate them with correct terminology and the correct structure of a Linux system. He can, at any time, correlate the terms to those that people understand and still be correct with respect to the kernel-GNU/userland dichotomy without misleading them.
But to throw around terms to those who are new to a Linux system is to paint an inaccurate picture at best and to mislead at worst.
I agree that there is no harm in using terms everyone can understand but they must be used within the proper context. And if you're going to educate the masses through an article then why not be accurate and communicative at the same time?
Just a thought...
Excellent point.
If the author claims to be educating people then he has an obligation to educate them with correct terminology and the correct structure of a Linux system. He can, at any time, correlate the terms to those that people understand and still be correct with respect to the kernel-GNU/userland dichotomy without misleading them.
But to throw around terms to those who are new to a Linux system is to paint an inaccurate picture at best and to mislead at worst.
I agree that there is no harm in using terms everyone can understand but they must be used within the proper context. And if you're going to educate the masses through an article then why not be accurate and communicative at the same time?
Just a thought...
No TA, you didn't read the whole article, because if you had read it, you wouldn't incorrectly attack the article as "total ignorance." It does not say that Ubuntu=Linux. You're hung up on one unimportant point and blowing it all out of proportion, and the position you're defending is not even a factual one- it's not a "fact" that GNU/Linux is the correct name. It's debatable whether it is correct to narrowly-define Linux as just the kernel, or something bigger. These are stupid issues to get hung up on no matter what audience you're targeting.
It's a good article. Noobs will learn a heck of lot more from the article than from all this microscopic fault-finding.
Linux: we don't need enemies, we have our friends!
It's a good article. Noobs will learn a heck of lot more from the article than from all this microscopic fault-finding.
Linux: we don't need enemies, we have our friends!
TC: You are correct. It's an article. It is done for the purpose of communicating. He communicated his points to the reader.
If it were an article for an academic journal it might matter. But for purposes of communicating with his audience, the article is not inaccurate. Calling it Linus's OS is not incorrect provided we know what object he is referring to.
If it were an article for an academic journal it might matter. But for purposes of communicating with his audience, the article is not inaccurate. Calling it Linus's OS is not incorrect provided we know what object he is referring to.
Once again:
I set up Linux based computers for people way less technically literate than the people the blokes article is aimed at, they would go near a itwire or any other computer oriented webpage, and they have no trouble understanding that Ubuntu, Mandriva, SuSE, Red Hat etc are Distributuions of Gnu/Linux. They are certainly what I would call the average Bloke and Blokette.
They understand this because they understand branding.
I set up Linux based computers for people way less technically literate than the people the blokes article is aimed at, they would go near a itwire or any other computer oriented webpage, and they have no trouble understanding that Ubuntu, Mandriva, SuSE, Red Hat etc are Distributuions of Gnu/Linux. They are certainly what I would call the average Bloke and Blokette.
They understand this because they understand branding.
Oh, now it's about branding? Mmkay. Perty strawman. You're never going to admit you're wrong for trashing a whole article because of one stupid minor debatable point, are you. Even if it was a clear-cut important point that's no reason to diss the whole article and treat it like dog doo. Too close to trolling for me- I'm done.
TC, it always has been about "branding". It's been about describing the Distribution properly, and not referring to it as the Operating System. By disseminating incorrect information, he has trashed his own article, I didn't do anything but point out that fact.
I guess nobody liked my poem...oh the inhumanity... :- )
To those who read forums and journals...
A distro is more than a kernel...
With Linux at its base, and GNU tools on its face...
Together they will live on eternal...
garymax September 2008
garymax September 2008
At the risk of creating a zombie horse (beat to death, now undead):
Here is a link that fully sums up tracyanne's point, in two sentences, directly from a founder of Ubuntu:
I'm very disappointed. As a derivative of Debian, and a predecessor to gNewSense, the Ubuntu project should be taking special care with Linux-related taxonomy. Instead, Mr. Zimmerman engages in a water-muddying exercise.
Here is a link that fully sums up tracyanne's point, in two sentences, directly from a founder of Ubuntu:
Quoting:Greg [Kroah-Hartman] considers the "Linux ecosystem" to be GCC, binutils, the Linux kernel, X.org, and a handful of other projects. He disregards most of the desktop stack (including GNOME and KDE), all desktop and server applications, and most anything else that is recognizable to an end user as "Linux".http://www.linux-magazine.com/online/news/kroah_hartman_atta...
I'm very disappointed. As a derivative of Debian, and a predecessor to gNewSense, the Ubuntu project should be taking special care with Linux-related taxonomy. Instead, Mr. Zimmerman engages in a water-muddying exercise.
How about this:
Where that comes from? Frontpage of Ubuntu-site. If you want to communicate with people trying to comprehend Ubuntu release schemes, because I assume that's what the article is about, it's a good idea to use the same terms as Ubuntu itself does. Because the article is about Ubuntu, not about Linux, GNU or operating systems.
If Ubuntu uses wrong terms and you're writing about Ubuntu, their are two possibilities; -Explain how Ubuntu is wrong and why. Then it would look like you're writing an article about Ubuntu, opinions and branding/wording, not about release schemes. Many fine articles have been written about this and forums have been filled with this (really? ahum...) ; not much need for yet another one. -Go with the flow, use the same wrong terms and write about what you really want to write; in this case release schemes. These release schemes are hard enough to comprehend, which is what the article is about I think (I didn't read all of it). Throwing in a discussion about how Ubuntu is wrong calling itself an OS doesn't make the release-scheme issue less complicated; and therefore sidestepping the issue is a defensible choice.
To be honest about this whole 'to be or not to be an OS' argument, I think devnet was extremely right with his first comment when he started this topic. Especially Ubuntu users don't care whether Ubuntu is an OS or not - just like MS Office users don't care if Office is an OS or not, as long as their computer runs, they can do their job and they know when to expect the next release and if they need that next release or not.
Quoting:Ubuntu is a community developed, Linux-based operating system
Where that comes from? Frontpage of Ubuntu-site. If you want to communicate with people trying to comprehend Ubuntu release schemes, because I assume that's what the article is about, it's a good idea to use the same terms as Ubuntu itself does. Because the article is about Ubuntu, not about Linux, GNU or operating systems.
If Ubuntu uses wrong terms and you're writing about Ubuntu, their are two possibilities; -Explain how Ubuntu is wrong and why. Then it would look like you're writing an article about Ubuntu, opinions and branding/wording, not about release schemes. Many fine articles have been written about this and forums have been filled with this (really? ahum...) ; not much need for yet another one. -Go with the flow, use the same wrong terms and write about what you really want to write; in this case release schemes. These release schemes are hard enough to comprehend, which is what the article is about I think (I didn't read all of it). Throwing in a discussion about how Ubuntu is wrong calling itself an OS doesn't make the release-scheme issue less complicated; and therefore sidestepping the issue is a defensible choice.
To be honest about this whole 'to be or not to be an OS' argument, I think devnet was extremely right with his first comment when he started this topic. Especially Ubuntu users don't care whether Ubuntu is an OS or not - just like MS Office users don't care if Office is an OS or not, as long as their computer runs, they can do their job and they know when to expect the next release and if they need that next release or not.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
Calling Ubuntu an "operating system" gives the impression that it is separate and distinct from, say, Slackware.
Referring to Ubuntu as an OS when talking to the uninitiated is sending the wrong message of the Linux ecosystem and gives the impression that Ubuntu is different from the ground up from other distributions (If other distributions are even mentioned at all).
If those penning these blogs and articles would take the time to accurately explain the basic concepts of Linux (Linux is the kernel, GNU utilities+userland apps are atop of the kernel, etc) not only would this be more accurate, it would also alert those new to Linux of the possibilities other interesting distros bring to the Linux landscape.
I think Ubuntu's being referred to as an "operating system" is an unintended consequence. Yet, it helps Ubuntu's popularity. But imagine the day when the person who thinks ubuntu is all there is suddenly discovers a world of possibilities in other distros. They may think Shuttleworth blinded their eyes to better distributions and they'll make a run for it.