digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at arstechnica.com

Why Linux isn't yet ready for synchronized release cycles

arstechnica.com — Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth has repeatedly called for Linux distributions and upstream software projects to synchronize their release cycles. Ars takes an in-depth look at the challenges that would arise from an effort to achieve release synchronization on the scale that Shuttleworth envisions.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • JSatt, on 05/21/2008, -21/+62Sounds like Shuttleworth is getting a little big for his britches. Who does he think he is, Linus?

    Time-based release cycles are just one of the problems that plagues windows. They're too worried about getting the product out on time and end up shipping an incomplete product, i.e. Vista. I would rather wait an extra couple of months for my next version of SuSE so long as I know that it's going to work likes it's supposed to.
    • ToadLeg, on 05/21/2008, -4/+71Shuttleworth founded Ubuntu, which is a pretty big accomplishment. Maybe one of the good things about open source programming is that someone like Shuttleworth can come up with new ideas without fear of being fired, and people can test them and send feedback to let him know how boneheaded the ideas may be before they cause a disaster. It would not be good if the leaders of Linux and FOSS become afraid to come out with new and bizarre ideas.
      • brettalton, on 05/21/2008, -2/+27@ToadLeg
        Someone digg this man up!

        @JSatt
        Also, don't forget, he was a Debian maintainer for a number of years in the 90's. He's not as unknown as some may think, but no, he's no Linus Torvalds.
      • krnldmp, on 05/21/2008, -1/+3Ubuntu isn't nearly half of what Linux was before and has since become. Everyone is entitled to their ideas though.
      • WhereAmI, on 05/21/2008, -8/+2Ubuntu is hardly an accomplishment. Its not even its own, its Debian based. Install Debian Etch and play with it and you'll see why Ubuntu is not really an "accomplishment".
        • marx2k, on 05/21/2008, -0/+10Accomplishment: My mom knows what Ubuntu is. She does not know what Debian is
        • rpgmaker, on 05/21/2008, -0/+9Hardly an accomplishment? It's the number one distro out there! It's based on Debian, we know that, but how does that change the facts? Too many people have come to the Linux (and FLOSS) world through Ubuntu, that's an accomplishment.
        • Stroggoth, on 05/21/2008, -1/+6And Firefox is just Mozilla with some UI added. Open source is all about taking ideas and code from commercial and open source and branding it your own.
      • Theli, on 05/22/2008, -2/+1A new version of Ubuntu is functional on the first day of its release, which is more than you can say about releases from projects that push the release-date until "it's finished". Take Windows Vista and KDE4 as examples of this.
    • colto, on 05/21/2008, -1/+9And even despite so Vista was still very delayed.
    • peestandingup, on 05/21/2008, -5/+8Nothings wrong with having timed release cycles. Apple does it all the time & gets it right for the most part. MS just sucks at it.
    • banmaster, on 05/21/2008, -8/+7So, vista wasn't completely scrapped 1/2 way through, thus missing its release date and pushed back an additional 2 years?
      Wow, I must have wandered into a parallel universe. Pity its still filled with sycophantic linux fanboys who have no idea about reality any more than the ones in the universe I came from.
      • Tenoq, on 05/21/2008, -3/+5Yeah... so in the end we got basically a re-hashed XP, with some security upgrades, a pretty GUI and a (IMO) ***** up audio architecture that made Creative a monopoly for gaming sound again.

        Seems like ***** all was done for the 5 year wait. Just think how far Linux has come in 5 years.
        • cquinnd, on 05/22/2008, -1/+2If you think all that resulted was a "rehashed XP" then you haven't been paying attention to fans or detractors of the OS.
    • Manther, on 05/21/2008, -1/+6JSatt, I don't think he's trying to force anyone's hand in putting something out every April and October here. Some of the major distros already have a 6 month release cycle, and I think Shuttleworth is just trying to take the initiative and try to get them all on the same 6 months. He's not saying 'bump your next release up 6 months to match my company,' he's even said that he'll move the Ubuntu release to accommodate the unification. He's looking out for everyone's best interest, IMHO, with each distro coming out at the same time, with all the same 'newest' features, we'll all be on the same page no matter which one we choose. Personally I think it's a great move.
      • Tenoq, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some distros just update continuously, rather than having full-version upgrades every six months? I don't know that any standardisation in this regard is particularly good for Linux. Some things do need standardisation, but this isn't one of them, IMO.
        • Manther, on 05/22/2008, -0/+0that's very true, and they can/should keep doing so. Shuttleworth's whole purpose first with Ubuntu, and now with these new ideas, is to get linux mainstream. Some say it's not possible, some say it is, I can't argue either way really, because I use it all the time, but I have a couple of friends I hooked up with it, and for some reason they'd rather use their roommates computers with windows, even though they only use AIM and check email (the windows computer even had a virus, so they had to be careful what they did....blew my mind, but I digress..). My point is, try telling the average "dumb"(for lack of a better term...maybe technically ignorant, but I hope you get the point) user that these things will get updated next month, those things the month after that, and a new version of that will come out as soon as it's ready, and they think they're dealing with something completely uncivilized and outdated.
    • rpgmaker, on 05/21/2008, -0/+4Mark has a point, he came out with that idea because he thinks that it would be good for the Linux marketing, the announcements will be bigger and most people will be aware of the existence of Linux no one can argue with that, what is uncertain is what would be the quality of the final product.

      "Ubuntu 8.04 demonstrates why strict schedules are undesirable"
      I love how Arstechnica is smashing Ubuntu and Mark for the quality of the Hardy release :) I just hope that they wake up in the next release.
      • daengbo, on 05/22/2008, -1/+2Ubuntu deserves to be bashed by Ars. Hardy was supposed to be an LTS release, but shipped with several bugs that should've been stoppers (e.g. the default photo app didn't even start in the 64-bit version).
      • sondr, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1LTS does not mean the initial version will be more stable than a regular Ubuntu release! It will have the same quality as any other Ubuntu release (well, statistically speaking a normal distribution). LTS *only* means it will be supported for a much longer time!

        Stability of LTS release = stability of regular release !!
    • gazzerh, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1I think he's aiming more for upstream projects to be synchronized and not distributions. One of the main issues with distribution release schedules is timing it so all upstream projects have stable releases at the time the distro releases.

      For example, both Ubuntu and Fedora 8 released with a beta version of Firefox. Fedora 8 doesn't have any nVidia or ATI drivers for the version of Xorg shipping with the distro. If projects were more synchronized then there is more of a chance to get a stable and complete release.

      Distros don't have to conform if they don't want to. They could release every 5 years. At least they'd know that when they do choose a date for release x, x and x upstream packages will be stable and ready for inclusion.
  • brettalton, on 05/21/2008, -13/+18I think the merging of Linux major distributions is more important, but less doable.

    I'd be able to do without a merger if PolicyKit went through, and there was a universal way to install software on all systems.
    • weizbox, on 05/21/2008, -3/+33'I think the merging of Linux major distributions is more important'
      Thank god not many people think like you :) I personally love the diversity of Linux distros.
      • jcannonb, on 05/21/2008, -4/+16The reality is the many different distros is one of the reasons why companies like Adobe don't put out Photoshop etc... Which platform do you aim for binary compatibility on?

        I personally prefer Fedora/CentOS/RHEL, but Ubunutu has made a single binary distribution quite popular, which is why we are starting to see more things 'made for Ubunutu'. Linux needs a little unification if it is going to become truly a mainstream desktop for 'everyone' to use, and not just the geeks and nerds.
        • bejayel, on 05/21/2008, -0/+6The problem with this is that, no matter which distrobution you support, someone, somewhere will port it to another distro. Hell, portage can work on Ubuntu if you want it to
        • kazamx, on 05/22/2008, -0/+4Isn't there really just the choice of RPM and .Deb? that would cover like 90%+ of linux users.
        • jcannonb, on 05/22/2008, -0/+4The packager choice isn't the issue. Kernel's vary between distro's, which means a much greater likely hood that compiled product on kernel A will not work on kernel B. Yes, open source doesn't matter, because you can just recompile, but companies like Adobe are not going to OpenSource CS.

          Apple would probably port iTunes to Linux if it could find a binarily sound way to distribute it and get ~90% of the linux market. I know I would prefer native iTunes support for my iPhone.
        • bangmalley, on 08/30/2008, -0/+2not all packages in certain distro is packaged by original programmers themselve. most of them is done by the community. programmer releases the source code, then the community will package it for specific distro. this is what i see on ubuntu, not sure about other distro.
          linux programs will work in almost all distro. distro is not another os. distro is still linux.
      • Purin, on 05/21/2008, -0/+5There is a universal way to install software on all systems.
        It's called compiling.
    • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -2/+4that would be a terrible idea. I personally use about 4 different distros on a regular basis.
      - PLD rescue - if I ever screw up something with grub, the MBR, or the kernel, this is the place to go
      - Debian Lenny - must-have for the desktop (I do a lot of development)
      - knoppix - slightly more advanced rescue, advantage of a web browser for those really weird problems
      - Damn Small - just for fun, on the MacBook

      Also: there is already a universal way to install software on all systems. it's called Apt, and it has super cow powers.
      • Tyr7BE, on 05/21/2008, -1/+1I use Ubuntu live CD for all of those things. There's no reason to have two separate recovery discs when all you need to do is fix grub.

        If we knocked off some of the hundreds of minority distros, or reduced the almost dozens of ways we have of installing and organizing software, maybe supporting a product like Photoshop on Linux wouldn't be so intimidating.
        • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2That kind of thing is not intimidating. all linux distros use the same basic software, the only difference is what libraries and software they choose to install. Other than that, they are (mostly) the same.

          And the very thing that makes linux so attractive is the fact that anyone _can_ just come along and make their own distribution. If they were rolled together, it would become very Microsoft-ish.
      • marx2k, on 05/21/2008, -1/+1apt has super cow powers on redhat? hmmm
      • Roy911, on 05/22/2008, -1/+2Dugg for Debian, Apt, and Super Cow Powers.

        Also, isn't Google Earth installable on all distributions w/o all the hell of different packages?
      • rlbond86, on 05/22/2008, -0/+2apt != yum
    • maninalift, on 05/21/2008, -1/+3There is diversity in some places where there should be standardization. I don't want for the merger of distributions (if anything I'm worried by the possible future impact of the dominance of the big U).

      I also don't know enough about PolicyKit but it seems to address some of the issues (not all I think) that make cross-distribution binary releases difficult as well as general security issues. Everyone who uses Linux knows that as stated in the PolicyKit docs "The way most people use pam-console and sudo is fundamentally broken. Full-fledged GTK+ or Qt applications run as the super user ". This looks really interesting, I have no idea whether it is a good solution to the problem but I think a good solution should be found and found soon.
  • brettalton, on 05/21/2008, -5/+23Aaron Seigo (a KDE programmer) stated that development was more important than integration? Of course he did! He's a developer while Ubuntu deals with integration. Also, its not like KDE can talk, their 4.0 release wasn't exactly peaches and cream either. Everyone is waiting on 4.1 just like businesses running Ubuntu are waiting for 8.04.1.
    • KillSudo, on 05/21/2008, -2/+10Who told you that when KDE4.0 was released that you where getting peaches and cream? I defiantly remember them saying that 4.0 was a current snapshot of code that was of enough quality to be a .0 release. They never even hinted at it being ready for production use except to show off what they where spending time on and to allow a massive flood of bug reports. The release worked as planned and they were able to immediately start fixing bugs and seeing where "the people" wanted it to head. If you disagree with Mr. Seigo I would like to here why. Since when did the wishes of the distributions override the wishes of developers that are working for free and mostly in their spare time? When people contribute at will you can't set hard dates. Mr. Seigos proposition that everyone else get together and pull KDEs trunk and determine when they think its right for release sounds like a much better plan that benefits everybody. If there are simple bugs that are not being tackled because of bigger issues but a distro wants to release right now with the current feature set and stability then why can't they track down the bugs and fix them while submitting the patches back to kde to become official? Sounds like everyone wins then.
  • tehjarvis, on 05/21/2008, -2/+12I prefer rolling updates...it's easier to find out what went wrong when I update and something breaks. When I updated to Hardy on my desktop, I had a whole load of trouble and didn't even know where to begin to fix them...so i just backed up my home folder and went back to gutsy.
    • cesclaveria, on 05/21/2008, -3/+19for next time, it is a good practice to have your home folder on a separate partition. so you can mess around with your OS without fear of losing your files. (I guess this could apply to windows also)
      • brettalton, on 05/21/2008, -0/+10Why are people burying cesclaveria?

        You *should* mount /home or 'My Documents' on a separate partition, that way, if the OS gets bricked, your documents are saved and you only have to wipe the OS partition instead of backing everything up, then wiping, then restoring your documents.
      • MKdx, on 05/21/2008, -2/+3Ubuntu also can preserve the home directory for you now:
        https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbiquityPreserveHome

        I think it's great new feautre with no formatting involved, just removing older directories and some inspection.

        Just be sure, not to check the [format] partition box when installing. Also there's always a risk of losing data even on installing some software, so it's your choice where to draw the line.
      • daengbo, on 05/22/2008, -0/+0A lot of config files changed with Hardy so taht rolling back is not as easy as one would think. Some app databases aren't compatible.
    • xsquirrel378x, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3arch and freeBSD are both really nice in that respect
    • zwaldowski, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Also, it was probably and update problem. You should've installed Hardy fresh.
      • tehjarvis, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1Kind of a pain to update every 6 months when I really don't have to. Hardy giving me problems just gives me an excuse to install a distro on my desktop that has rolling updates.
        • zwaldowski, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1(BTW, this is not meant to sound rude)

          Three things:
          1. Updates between distro releases are not assured to work (this sucks unless you have a home directory backup, I've learned the hard way)
          2. Rolling releases actually have worse stability between packages, kind of like Windows applying hotfixes in screwed up orders
          3. Trust me, Hardy is *so* much better than Gutsy.
  • arlok789, on 05/21/2008, -10/+5If Linux is super good and its free, imagine how good it would be if millions of dollars of development money was dumped into it.
    • banmaster, on 05/21/2008, -2/+9Then it would have to be 'un-free' then wouldn't it. People generally want a return on their money.
    • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -2/+6terrible. People currently develop it for fun, or because they want to. I would rather have someone develop something because they want to, rather than they were paid to.
      • Tyr7BE, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3Yes that's right. Money makes things terrible.

        Personally, I would rather have someone who loves what they do devoting a minimum of 8 hours per day to a project than have them come home from another job already tired and sick of the computer, to poke away half-assedly at a project for a few hours in the evening.

        There's no rule that says you can't want to work on something and get paid to do it at the same time.
        • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -0/+5You clearly do not understand the mindset of developers. When I come home from a 8 to 5 job, I find it quite relaxing to program on a pet project. I have had the opportunity to see two pieces of code that do something very similar; one was developed by an employee I worked with, and one was developed by a programming hobbyist from ukraine. The one from Ukraine was much more efficient, more stable, and generally better featured than the in-house version we made.

          I would recommend that you do some dev work sometime to actually understand both it, and the people who enjoy doing it.
        • Tyr7BE, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1Don't go making assumptions about random folks on the internet. I do operating systems development for 8 to 10 hours per day. I enjoy what I do, but it's my job - by the end of it each day, I don't want very much of anything to do with a computer. But that's just me, I'm a bit of a luddite at heart.

          My point is, I get paid to do my work, and I take a good deal of pride in what I do. It brings me satisfaction. If something is inefficient or unstable, I'll make it better. Whether or not I'm getting money for it is of little consequence.
        • daftman, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1> Don't go making assumptions about random folks on the internet
          A few posts earlier:
          > I would rather have someone who loves what they do devoting a minimum of 8 hours per day to a project than have them come home from another job already tired and sick of the computer, to poke away half-assedly at a project for a few hours in the evening.

          You're making assumption that's the person who poke away at home is doing a half-ass job. Ironic isn't it?

          > by the end of it each day, I don't want very much of anything to do with a computer. But that's just me, I'm a bit of a luddite at heart.

          Glad to see you admit that it's only you.
    • staeiou, on 05/21/2008, -0/+9It already has. IBM employs over 600 people full time to do nothing but write GPL code. They've made substantial contributions not only to Linux, but Apache, PHP, Samba, and OO.org. You know JFS, the filing system? They wrote pretty much that whole thing and then GPLed it.

      They say that it has been well worth the investment, as they avoid the Microsoft tax and have become the place for Linux-loving IT people who want to buy hardware. And as Linux becomes a better OS, they get more customers, so they have an interest in making the OS objectively better. See http://www-03.ibm.com/linux/community.html
    • duderdude, on 05/21/2008, -0/+6Millions of dollars are already being poured into Open Source/Linux development. Ubuntu, Redhat, Suse, Xandros, Mandrake are all commercial entities. Plus, thousands of lines of code are being contributed from companies like IBM, Sun, QT, and hundreds of others. Then on top of that, think about all of the Web 2.0 companies like Digg, Google, and Yahoo who really almost exclusively on LAMP stack software and contribute tons of stuff back to the community. It's big money.
    • coresnake, on 05/21/2008, -4/+1I can haz OSX?
  • dabura, on 05/21/2008, -15/+10i thought MrBabyman quits
    • shondell, on 05/21/2008, -9/+2well you thought wrong.
    • bejayel, on 05/21/2008, -4/+4You can never quit digg. Even if that douchbag actually did "quit" i am sure he would be right back under a new username.
  • SoIcanDigg, on 05/21/2008, -17/+3Dugg for MrBabyMan.
    • shondell, on 05/21/2008, -6/+2same here buddy.
    • cesclaveria, on 05/21/2008, -3/+1i just hope he is not diggin from the bathroom....
    • banmaster, on 05/21/2008, -5/+4Why? Dugg for a crybaby who said he'd quit coz people got sick of him resubmitting others' stories, but then didn't??
      I see the logic behind that allright!
  • digitallysick, on 05/21/2008, -4/+18How about a unified package system for all linux distros. Similar to how an exe, or dmg works for windows/mac. Instead of having so many different package types for linux.
    • banmaster, on 05/21/2008, -9/+7Thats probably the biggest reason that while I try various linuxes every year or so, I quickly give up and go back to windows where everything pretty much just works.
      • Tyr7BE, on 05/21/2008, -3/+6I've yet to find a piece of software that doesn't offer a deb package. I'd really like to see Fedora swallow its pride and just move to deb. That would more or less settle things and let people get on with actual work.
        • init100, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4"I'd really like to see Fedora swallow its pride and just move to deb."

          And I'd really like to see the Debian and Ubuntu crowds swallow their pride, drop apt and deb, and move to yum and rpm. After all, it's the standard format of the Linux Standard Base.
    • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -2/+3like deb/rpm? or the source?
      • Tyr7BE, on 05/21/2008, -4/+8The guy just suggested one package system, and you brought up three potentials. This is exactly the problem. If everyone used deb, there would be no differing package formats.

        It seems your comments so far are advocating everything that most people see as wrong with Linux today.
        • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -1/+3have you even _heard_ of alien? and if you want one type of software format, than get the tarball! I can _promise_ it will work on any system you throw at it.
        • marx2k, on 05/21/2008, -1/+6Alien eats rpms for breakfast and spits out broken debs.
        • Tyr7BE, on 05/22/2008, -1/+3Alien does indeed suck the big one. And yes the tarball works on any system, provided you have all your dev tools set up properly.

          Sounds like you want everyone and their dog to become developers like yourself. I was like that once, long ago. I grew out of it before I left University though.
        • rlbond86, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1Or maybe everyone should use ABS?
    • kleverness, on 05/22/2008, -0/+3I think the real solution to this problem is to come up with a tool (with Qt and GTK frontends) which manages the packages and has multiple backends for every package type so the user doesn't have to worry about this.
      This project exists: http://www.packagekit.org/pk-intro.html
      Hope they succeed :)
  • xsquirrel378x, on 05/21/2008, -4/+11and this is why people like debian and slackware. its ready when its ready
    • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3not always. Thus Sid.
      • xsquirrel378x, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3sure but even so. running sid is your choice. im not a debian user myself but im sure many people like its rigorously tested stable and testing braches
        • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3oh, I know. I personally love the testing distro. LOVE IT!!! In the least perverted human-computer way possible.
  • psilanthropist, on 05/21/2008, -14/+6***** the RIAA ?
  • stix213, on 05/21/2008, -4/+10I prefer software to be released when it is ready.... not by an arbitrary release cycle time-line. This allows time for bigger features to be implemented and fully tested (longer release) and smaller features to be added, tested, and released faster.

    But what do I know.... Maybe it is better to just release a buggy version early because the calender tells you to - or even better, to just drop revolutionary features because they can't fit into the schedule from the Linux gods....
    • Manther, on 05/21/2008, -1/+1I think that's what the 6 month release cycle is all about. Major versions every year, and a smaller features release in between. And since something is coming out every 6 months, there's not a huge motivation to try and squeeze something in before it's ready (like windows and their 'who knows when the next version is coming out, this needs to be out NOW, we'll fix it with the service packs if we have to' mentality.). They can easily just wait 6 more months to make sure something is ready...
      • stix213, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1I just think there would be less out of the box thinking if all major features had to be bug free within 6 months. I can easily see some revolutionary features taking 1+ years to complete, but would likely be skipped for ideas that are just upgrades to existing thinking because of a 6 month time limit.

        my 2 cents
      • rlbond86, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1I think Ars points out the biggest problem with a 6-month release cycle: what if you want to add a feature that takes 12 months? It will never get done because by the time you finished, you'd have to merge it in, but your code will apply to 2 versions ago.
    • WhereAmI, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3KDE 4.0 did that and look how pissed Linux users got.
    • harlowsmonkeys, on 05/21/2008, -1/+2What makes you think anyone would have to release early? If the agreed upon schedule is for releases in, say, January and July, and someone finds they can't make January, then they can push back their release until July, giving them time to implement more features, and test longer.
      • stix213, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Problem is what will actually happen is the software will be nearly ready, but instead of testing for another 3 weeks, they would have to wait another 6 months for the release..... So someone will make the call that they can risk an early release to make the release date....... This already happens all the time in proprietary software already when a deadline "needs" to be met.

        Then OSS gets bad press for buggy software
  • krnldmp, on 05/21/2008, -2/+5Linux will never need any such thing.
  • mmcgrath, on 05/21/2008, -5/+7Mark is one of the few guys in the field that has made millions from open source software. People should really start listening to him... Huh? Ohhhh, my mistake. He hasn't made ANY money from Open Source. He made his money during the boom? By creating non-open source software? Oh? What's that? He's actually been losing money at a very rapid rate at canonical trying and failing to get Ubuntu to turn a profit? I wonder when he'll get bored and give up on Ubuntu, its no secret that Canonical can't sustain itself right now.
  • MKdx, on 05/21/2008, -1/+3It can encourage more companies/vendors to support their product on Linux, or support more products. As they would know what version of kernel/Gnome/KDE/xorg etc they expect to support for, say, next year or two, instead of supporting the various release points that would be there.

    Shuttleworth didn't ask others to follow his release schedule, actually he even offered to change Ubuntu release to fit with others if the *suggestion* passed (or rather the *idea* he put for discussion).
  • ahmedinejad, on 05/21/2008, -6/+0Earth!
  • efitz11, on 05/21/2008, -6/+1don't leave them all in the same room for an extended period of time
  • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -7/+4OK. based on the comments, I think people need to understand this. Linux was not created to be user friendly. It was not created so you could run compiz on it. It was not created for noobs. It started as a terminal emulator, and evolved. Much of its development has been geared toward security and networking. almost all of its features were created because someone wanted a feature that didn't exist yet. The same goes for most of the software on it. Much of the open source development work was done be volunteers who wanted something. So if you want a feature, stop bitching about it on Digg, and do it yourself. That's what open source is all about. It's DIY.
    • Tyr7BE, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3"all of its features were created because someone wanted a feature that didn't exist yet"

      "It was not created for noobs"

      That's pretty much what Ubuntu is all about. They put together something user friendly for noobs (and pretty much any desktop user in general). This is someone saying "linux doesn't have any features for noobs, I'm going to add that".

      I think you need to understand that Linux was created to be whatever people want it to be. As you say, it evolves. If people want it to be user friendly, it will be user friendly. If people want it to be secure, it will be secure. If people want good networking, it will develop good networking. If people want all of the above, it will acquire all of the above.
      • stargatesteve, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1I couldn't agree with you more. My point is that I'm tired of people whining and complaining in the comments about how "Linux should do this", "Linux should do that", "Linux should be purple". It really grates on the ears, especially after I have developed on linux for several years.
  • noseeme, on 05/21/2008, -2/+4Ubuntu handles it pretty well in my opinion.
  • Dylson, on 05/21/2008, -14/+1Linux isn't ready for anything....
    • WhereAmI, on 05/21/2008, -0/+7Excluding Diggs servers. And if you use a Linksys router I've got news for you...
    • fredmv, on 05/21/2008, -1/+7Yeah, that's why NASA uses it.

      And Google.

      And the U.S. Army.

      Go crawl back under your rock.
  • hexx54, on 05/21/2008, -8/+3Dugg for MrBabyMan!
  • cantormath, on 05/21/2008, -1/+2Why People who write articles like this will alway pay for inferior software.......
  • amightywind, on 05/21/2008, -5/+3The whole idea of discrete, big bang releases is horribly outdated. Keep the fascism out of GNU/Linux. Use Gentoo.
  • kcap122, on 05/21/2008, -3/+1Hasn't anyone just thought of unifying the manpower from all of the linux distributions to create a grand unified attractive, stable, and functional operating system? I like Ubuntu but it could be even better if the coders from some of the other distributions put some time in instead of working on projects that will be orphaned within five years. The combined resources could bring the OS closer to being a legitimate replacement (I mean legit without a wink and a nudge) for Mac or Windows. Why doesn't the linux community do this?
    Seriously, does anyone know why linux development is so clannish?
  • coresnake, on 05/21/2008, -2/+2Looking at the comments it seems to me that Linux'ers will always be against convenience in any shape of form
    (I'm talking about integration of the different linuxes or at least a common executable format)
  • watcht, on 05/22/2008, -0/+3Synchro releases are good and bad, you got this nice entacipation from the crowd of users, and supporter love. At the same time you get a deadline stress and other pressures on devolpers, programmers, coders, etc. and some features get cut, bugs dont get ironed out, and you sorta get something like when Hardy first came out.
    However opposite can be said on released when finished, users get pissed and start not caring anymore, but the build team is nice and relaxed. Sometimes this can be overdone, like Duke Nukem Forever
  • LoungeFlyX, on 05/22/2008, -8/+0This is hillarious. Mark has it right ... to be sucessfull this needs to happen. That is why you see so much commercial software from Microsoft work so well with other MS products. They actually talk to one another and build features that work together ... who would have throught. Still this seems all to organised for the freetards to master.... i mean talking is pretty hard work :)
    • daengbo, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1The Internet was built using RFCs, not by coordinating release cycles. Contributing to and following Freedesktop.org specs will accomplish anything that coordinated release cycles would, and you'll have the added bonus of releasing your software when it's ready, not when the timer dings.
  • mindlessknight, on 05/22/2008, -5/+5Stop criticizing Shuttleworth! The man is making the world a better place!
    It doesn't matter if he accomplishes as much as Torvalds, Gates, or Jobs.....
    Ubuntu seems to be making the world a better place for the most part !
    Microsoft is even making the world a better place!
    If you guys don't think Ubuntu is an accomplishment perhaps you would like
    to step up and do something that you WOULD consider an accomplishment...
    Don't criticize for no purpose! Be productive!!
  • gotmilk4, on 05/31/2008, -0/+1I really don't see the point of a synchro release system.

    I'd much rather have a complete and relatively stable system over a pushed system that had to be released to fit timelines.
  • danastasio1025, on 06/17/2008, -0/+0no, is isn't ready because ubuntu sucks, and for that matter, all LINUX SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ITS AWEFUL, I BET YOU'VE NEVER EVEN USED IT. LIKE SO MANY PEOPLE I KNOW, YOU FOLLOW BLINDLY, NOT REALLY KNOWING WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. LINUX SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.