Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Canonical Moving Away From GNOME Control Center

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the if-you-want-something-done-right dept.

Ubuntu 208

jones_supa writes "This announcement comes from the ubuntu-desktop mailing list. Due to GNOME Control Center already being a heavily patched version in Ubuntu, Canonical is planning to found their own fork called Unity Control Center. This would be a fork with a limited lifespan and later on they would move to something called Ubuntu System Settings, an in-house project. For now, a PPA has been set up to test the new fork."

cancel ×

208 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

NIH (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662597)

It's weird how a project that consists of repackaging everything Debian has developed such a NIH problem.

Re:NIH (4, Insightful)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 8 months ago | (#45662743)

Mod Parent up.

You shouldn't have posted anonymous because you nailed it with the first post. This NIH syndrome they've developed will ultimately be the end of Canonical. In the long run they can't sustain the independent development on all these separate and diverse features, not unless Shutleworth is going to continue to fund this with millions of his own money in perpetuity.

Re:NIH (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662787)

I post anonymous because I don't have, nor want, a traceable account.

Re:NIH (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662827)

It's funny. I'm the guy who posted first, and parent isn't me, but I would have said the same thing.

Re:NIH (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662847)

I'm actually the guy who posted first and this is completely incorrect. The reason I post anonymously is because my browser has trouble supporting cookies.

Re:NIH (1)

jareth-0205 (525594) | about 8 months ago | (#45662895)

I'm actually the guy who posted first and this is completely incorrect. The reason I post anonymously is because my browser has trouble supporting cookies.

Argh this is the problem when everybody posts AC!

Re:NIH (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662917)

better than posting as a nigger

Re:NIH (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662999)

you sound like a nigger though.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663033)

I'm actually the guy who posted first and this is completely incorrect. The reason I post anonymously is because my browser has trouble supporting cookies.

Argh this is the problem when everybody posts AC!

PROTIP: It does not matter why people post as AC.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662927)

No! I'm Brian. And so's my wife.

Re:NIH (4, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | about 8 months ago | (#45662821)

This NIH syndrome they've developed will ultimately be the end of Canonical.

For me, their desire to monetize our searches and undermine our privacy is what is marking the end of Canonical.

Now I just need to find a suitable replacement, because every time I hear about Canonical these days I like them even less.

Re:NIH (3, Informative)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 8 months ago | (#45662911)

Linux Mint, if you want a distribution geared towards the same kind of modernity and ease of use that made Ubuntu so popular to begin with.

Or Debian, if you want to pick a distribution whose organization is least likely to fuck it up or sell out.

Re:NIH (0)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 8 months ago | (#45662993)

I switched from Ubuntu to Puppy OS. It's about the easiest OS I've ever installed, and can run on just about anything.
Mint wasn't very intuitive to me... granted I only ran it for a few hours. But PuppyOS just works strait away. My wife even uses it to browse the net sometimes and doesn't even have to ask me questions. That's amazing as far as I'm concerned.

Re:NIH (4, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | about 8 months ago | (#45663387)

"Mint wasn't very intuitive to me... granted I only ran it for a few hours"

The nipple is the only intuitive interface. All others are learned.

If people would quit chasing an impossible goal of an intuitive interface and focus on making functional interfaces instead, it would be a huge improvement.

Re:NIH (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 8 months ago | (#45663763)

If people would quit chasing an impossible goal of an intuitive interface and focus on making functional interfaces instead, it would be a huge improvement.

Why can't we have both?

Many years ago, when the web was first relatively new, a friend said that the web had put back user interface design by a good decade or more (and he was someone who was doing interface design). I'm not entirely certain we've ever gotten back to where we were, as the focus has been on everything-as-a-webapp, or using generic widgets which do a lousy job of expressing some kinds of information.

I've seen a fair few things presented as more or less a table view, which in the old days would have had pieces built to more suit that kind of data because it was more understandable in terms of what you're seeing (because it isn't really a table for instance).

And I can't even begin to count the number of dialog boxes I've seen that can't fit all of their information on screen, but can neither scroll nor be resized. Which has the effect of making the dialog box useless in some cases.

To me, so many GUIs try to shove everything into visual paradigms that don't make sense for what you're displaying. Many years ago I had to build some custom screen widgets to display information which in no way could be represented with standard widgets, but these days everyone just picks one of the standard ones and decides it will have to do.

I refuse to believe that a GUI can't be both intuitive and functional.

Re:NIH (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663771)

Apparently you're not a mother. Proper nipple use is taught. If they're being too rough you don't leave them there. Reenforcement learning from the start. Babies naturally try to put everything in their mouth and we naturally hold babies near our nipples. Things work out, the baby feels better, so things continue to improve.

Re:NIH (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 8 months ago | (#45663087)

Thanks, I'll look into those.

Re:NIH (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 8 months ago | (#45663403)

"For me, their desire to monetize our searches and undermine our privacy is what is marking the end of Canonical."

For me, it's both. There is that, AND the fact that Canonical has been becoming ever less and less "canonical" Linux.

In fact it's getting rather difficult to even call it legitimate Linux anymore. I suppose it is, but in a way that hasn't been pleasing very many people.

Re:NIH (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#45664041)

As I always say^H^H^Hask: point me to the word Linux on any of Canonical's web pages.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663219)

Why is this such a big deal that Ubuntu is going to make their own application from which to configure system settings. XFCE and KDE have their control panels, why shouldn't Ubuntu make one that integrate more seamlessly into Unity? Why is diverging from gnome such a terrible thing. Only an idiot or Canonical basher would assume that users give a shit about a simple control panel, ffs.

Re:NIH (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663269)

It is a big deal You name projects that can run on any distro, but Canonical is rolling a Ubuntu-only Ubuntu targeted version.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663835)

Woopidy doo poo poo.
Ubuntu is fast becoming something besides "standard FOSS" Linux.
That's a good thing. I've transitioned away from Ubuntu on my desktop, but I'm still curious to see what niches Ubuntu will fill. Maybe I'll find extremely useful on some other device one day. There are plenty of Debian based distros. I wish Ubuntu dev team success.

Re:NIH (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45664075)

That's a lie. All their code is GPL'd, and anyone who wants to package it for their distribution can do so and have done so in the past.

Re:NIH (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662819)

Debian hasn't developed squat. They just package whatever Red Hat and others sources outside of Debian produce. In fact, their only substantial contribution to Linux is their packaging system, APT.

Re:NIH (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663147)

Well, if you think it's such a minor contribution I suggest you start building all your packages by hand, test them, make sure they can be installed and distributed in compliance with the license. Them come back and tell us again that Debian hasn't done anything.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663351)

Yo, genius, ever hear of Slackware? It ain't rocket science to put together a distribution. There's hundreds of them on distrowatch.

Oh, Debian hasn't done anything worthy of their accolades. Except to serve as an upstream to the most popular, polished distribution in the history of Linux. That's about it. Fedora has made many, many times more valuable contributions to Linux than Debian has.

Re:NIH (3, Insightful)

skids (119237) | about 8 months ago | (#45663209)

Considering packaging is exactly where a distro's development focus should be, I'd say they are working just fine. Also, APT isn't the packaging system, dpkg is.

Re:NIH (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 8 months ago | (#45663383)

Red Hat developed Dpkg, APT, and a distributed deployment infrastructure? That's news to me.

Oh yeah, how are the Red Hat PPC, FreeBSD, and Hurd ports coming along?

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45664109)

Apparently you don't read the Debian developers list. PPC, FreeBSD and Hurd probably aren't going to be around much longer after the next release. There's a lot of pressure to drop those ports. S390 already been dropped as I understand it.

Re:NIH (1)

PrimaryConsult (1546585) | about 8 months ago | (#45663855)

While apt is probably their most substantial contribution, for a server appropriate distro they have the best free support available, and that is partly due to the Debian philosophy. Yes there's a bunch of RedHat clones but they all suffer from the same issue: people seriously using RedHat are paying for the support (either through them or Oracle), which means they have access to a knowledgebase with excellent quality control and noise filtering. With a significant amount of support occurring behind the paywall, the free support is... lacking. For Debian, everyone gets the same access to the same support avenues, which means everyone gets access to the solutions.

Tl;dr: I find Debian to be the easiest distro to find free solutions to arbitrary and obscure issues.

Re:NIH (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662863)

Funny, because that's exactly what's plauging Gnome, lately. Or, I should actually say, Red Hat.

Red Hat can't compete with Ubuntu in technical merit, so they create shit just to give themselves a slight marketing edge. Never mind the fact that they don't bother to adhere to Unix standards and can't be bothered to fix or maintain their shit properly.

Re:NIH (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 8 months ago | (#45663041)

Redhat and Canonical aren't even in the same league. Redhat is managing major projects like KVM. Canonical spends its energies on pointless projects that no one wants. I don't want to lionize Redhat in any way, but if Canonical fell into a hole in the Earth tomorrow, Linux was go merrily along, but if Redhat died, it would have a pretty serious and negative effect on a number of key projects.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663119)

Yet, it is still the most popular distro. It's used in businesses, law enforcement agencies, schools, personal desktops, laptops, soon-to-be phones and tablets, tvs. As far as Red Hat dying? That's like saying if Microsoft died, the computer industry would disappear. It's very stupid to say. If Red Hat died, there would be many more startups eager to take its place. If fact, Red Hat is detrimental to the Linux "ecosystem" since it becoming to much of a monoculture.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663423)

Ubuntu is doing more than anyone to bring Linux to the desktop [canonical.com]

Re:NIH (1)

jbrandv (96371) | about 8 months ago | (#45663645)

Correction: Ubuntu WAS doing more than anyone to bring Linux to the desktop. There, fixed that for you.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663709)

Nope. They still are. There, I fixed your fix.

Re:NIH (2)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#45664079)

Does Ubuntu use a Linux kernel?

Re:NIH (4, Informative)

umafuckit (2980809) | about 8 months ago | (#45662883)

It's weird how a project that consists of repackaging everything Debian has developed such a NIH problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here [wikipedia.org] Because I didn't know what it meant.

Re:NIH (4, Funny)

skids (119237) | about 8 months ago | (#45663223)

You should have just made up your own words to fit the letters.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663067)

No shit. Look, they are ignoring the fact that GNOME is in a major way different from
other technologies: it is and always has been one of the biggest drivers
of Linux infrastructure. Wherever you look, if it's udev, or dbus or, or
systemd, or NM, or all the other infrastructure that the GNOME guys or
people connected to the GNOME community have created: it's the desktop
that drove them, and specifically the GNOME project, way more than other
desktop environments.

Without GNOME you wouldn't have standardized IPC on Linux (I mean,
seriously fuck it, which other general purpose OS has no sane
standardized IPC to start with?), there wouldn't be sane device
management, nothing. The "base OS" people of Linux couldn't get here shit
together to get this infrastructure in place, so the GNOME guys had to
do it instead.

The idea that Canonical can do the same as what the GNOME guys have done is ludicrous.

Seriously, they should show some respect to the GNOME project from time to
time. It gives you more than you might want to acknowledge. Canonical shouldn't try to
fuck it up with their attempts to reign into what the desktop guys think
a desktop should be like. If Fedora wants to continue to drive
technology, then you need to do your best to promote GNOME, not to work
against it, and try to rule into what its design decisions are.

Re:NIH (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663289)

you are confused, Linux is just a kernel, nothing more. The userland is not a Linux project, there is no "base OS" people of Linux at all.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663821)

C'mon...that's not very constructive comment... He obviously means a full Linux operating system when he talks about Linux.

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663957)

Ha Ha. If I'm confused the so is Lennart Poettering (given that I used his own words)

And yupp, I might not be in the RH desktop group anymore, and we strive
for universiality with systemd [can you say vendor lockin, rube?] but heck, tht mind set the GNOME guys
always had, which is to fix the problems where there are and create the
infrastructure where its missing, that's certainly the same mindset that
created systemd and hence much of the core of what Fedora now is. I for
one am proudly a member of the GNOME community, and yes, I trust their
desktop designs a lot more than I would trust yours.

Re:NIH (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663237)

It's weird how a project that consists of repackaging everything Debian has developed such a NIH problem.

Nothing weird about it. Shuttleworth has clearly decided he no longer wants to keep pouring money down the drain for a bunch of ingrates, so Canonical needs to figure out a way to commercialize Ubuntu immediately. That means trying to water down down the UI into something the unwashed masses will tolerate.

Re:NIH (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663343)

No, Ubuntu would have no business at all if some IT people weren't comfortable enough with it to get it in the door of the enterprise. That's how Red Hat got into the boardroom. but then Red Hat turned its back on the userbase. It closed off its server/workstation distro to the users, making alternative distro where users are guinea pigs. Because of that Redhat lost mindshare and customers (to Canonical, in many cases). We've gone from hundreds of Red Hat servers to one where I work, in favor of other distro

Re:NIH (1)

JonJ (907502) | about 8 months ago | (#45663799)

Because of that Redhat lost mindshare and customers (to Canonical, in many cases).

So a move Red Hat did in 2003 made them lose customers to an unproven upstart company with no solution for the enterprise i 2005. Sounds legit.

Re:NIH (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663829)

yes, such is the power of providing good desktop with community. too bad they're throwing their chance away though

Re:NIH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663413)

There may be good reasons to fork Gnome3
http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/nautilus-next
http://afaikblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/new-folder2.png

Re:NIH (1, Informative)

KiloByte (825081) | about 8 months ago | (#45663637)

Considering that components of Gnome demand to replace even the init system with a NIH unmaintenable un-reasonably-modifiable monstrosity, Ubuntu distancing itself from Gnome is not a NIH syndrome, it's basic sanity.

kernel (2)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 8 months ago | (#45662647)

I heard they have tons of kernel patches as well, so soon they'll start a new in-house project, called Hurd!

(Still) Ubuntu user here, but couldn't resist.

Ubuntu Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662651)

Why don't they just develop their own kernel and be done with it?

Re:Ubuntu Linux (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 8 months ago | (#45662781)

They could take Minix, and nothing would then be GPL

Re:Ubuntu Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663311)

Funny, considering the oft-criticized Mir display server is GPLv3, while the Wayland guys are MIT.

Re:Ubuntu Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663377)

Aren't both projects oft-criticized? Wayland lacks network transparency. That makes it 100% certain to be replaced ASAP on any system I end up installing.

Re:Ubuntu Linux (3, Interesting)

game kid (805301) | about 8 months ago | (#45663047)

If you've been to the front pages of their website lately you'd notice an almost-complete lack of "Linux" now. I'm not sure how much the real reason for that is "trying not to break some arcane legal or Linux Mark Institute rules", or how much it's "awful covert marketing campaign for yet-unnamed replacement kernel".

Clearly they don't want to be associated with Linux...or, given their recent demeanor, most anyone.

Re:Ubuntu Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663373)

Modded you up. Although I'm one of the few (apparently) slashdotters who likes how Ubuntu is developing I just spent ten minutes on the website and I couldn't find the word 'Linux' anywhere not just on the front page.

Re:Ubuntu Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663779)

Well, if you head on over to Fedora's and Red Hat's websites, you'll not find a single instance of the term "GNU/Linux" appearing anywhere on their front page. It's almost like there is a concerted, covert campaign to completely efface the contributions of the FSF, and theGNU Project to Linux. Weird.

Re:Ubuntu Linux (1)

Jamie Ian Macgregor (3389757) | about 8 months ago | (#45663817)

if only they'd remove all references to unity as well.

BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662669)

Is this supposed to be worthy of front-page attention? Or this just more faux rage click-bait?

Re:BFD (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about 8 months ago | (#45662897)

It worked, didn't it?

Re:BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663553)

yeah, unsurprisingly.

Re:BFD (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663365)

yes, Canonical continues to leave userbase behind and trying to get vendor lockin. they are squandering their popularity on things that are alienating their fan base.

Re:BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663633)

Vendor lockin? Are you fucking kidding me? You have Gnome creating dependency on an DM, which has a dependency on a specific login daemon and message bus daemon which has specific dep. on an init system, which is going to have a dependency on SELinux, which going to etc. etc. All software projects maintained and controlled by 1 corporation, Red Hat. There's your vendor locking, dipshit. When you install Gnome on your Debian system you're going to be surprised that your really ended up installing Fedora.

Re:BFD (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 8 months ago | (#45663813)

you are the dipshit, you're only citing projects with the same problem as Canonical that have caused the same problems of alienating and driving away users. so you prove my point. fucktard.

Why? (5, Funny)

lennier1 (264730) | about 8 months ago | (#45662689)

Kinda strange, since Canonical and the Gnome guys definitely deserve each other.

Not surprising or newsworthy (4, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#45662721)

Ubuntu is steadily moving away from Gnome and aligning more with Qt. (See: Ubuntu Phone's QML-based UI.) Getting rid of Gnome's system settings is just another small step in that direction.

Re:Not surprising or newsworthy (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 8 months ago | (#45662799)

In which case, why did they sell Kubuntu? They could have just started w/ that, or used Razor-qt in putting together their UI

Re:Not surprising or newsworthy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662867)

One, Unity isn't going to be KDE based, its going to QT based. Two, they didn't sell Kubuntu, they just stopped paying 1 guy to work on it. Kubuntu has always been a community project.

Re:Not surprising or newsworthy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662889)

I for one am glad they didn't pull this Unity crap with Kubuntu.

Re:Not surprising or newsworthy (2)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#45663339)

Canonical is moving towards Qt, not KDE.

Re:Not surprising or newsworthy (0)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#45664093)

And towards MS.

Hybryde Linux - they should follow them (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45662771)

"Hybryde Linux is an Ubuntu-based distribution for the desktop. Its most unusual feature is an option to switch rapidly between multiple desktop environments and window manager without logging out - the list includes Enlightenment 17, GNOME 3 (GNOME Shell and GNOME 3 "Fallback" mode), KDE, LXDE, Openbox, Unity, Xfce and FVWM.

This is achieved via a highly customisable Hy-menu, which also allows launching applications and configuring the system. All open applications are carried to any of the available desktops. The system offers an interesting way to work fluidly in a multi-desktop environment."

http://www.hybryde.org/ [hybryde.org]

That looks pretty cool (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45662907)

That does look cool, but why on earth did they base it on Ubuntu, instead of Debian? Looks like they want to do things their own way, but they've huddled up under Ubuntu's umbrella, where it's the "Ubuntu way, or the highway!" As a straight Debian derivative, they would have far more room to maneuver, which ever direction they decided to maneuver in.

Re:Hybryde Linux - they should follow them (2)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#45663129)

This is achieved via a highly customisable Hy-menu

"Hy-menu"? Somebody's been cherry-picking the dictionary here...

Re:Hybryde Linux - they should follow them (1)

organgtool (966989) | about 8 months ago | (#45663665)

Hybryde Linux: Changing your desktop is as simple as busting out the Hy-menu!

Re:Hybryde Linux - they should follow them (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663905)

It sounds interesting, so I checked their site. They have an Enter button. Fuck no. If their website UI is such a failure that you have to click a button to trigger an animation of a partially transparent 'blind' which pulls back to let you actually use the site, I will not have anything to do with them.

First it wastes my time and second it was designed to fail enabled. With Javascript disabled, the button shouldn't have been displayed since it isn't click-able and thus the site was completely useless even through it loaded properly underneath the cover. If they can't design a website properly I have no trust in them being able to handle a desktop environment. They don't understand proper quality and failure modes or they don't care enough to implement them. Their website tells me their distro will be unstable.

In (future) related news... (2)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 8 months ago | (#45662939)

... Canonical is moving Ubuntu away from Linux to an in-house project named "invented here". Mark Shuttleworth assures that "invented here" will be ~100% backward compatible with Linux for "some time". Mr Shuttleworth went on to say "blah, blah, blah ... enhanced user experience". Many long-time Ubuntu users are annoyed and have vowed to switch to "alternate distro".

Re:In (future) related news... (1)

sqorbit (3387991) | about 8 months ago | (#45663043)

While I'm not a big fan of Ubuntu I do have to give them credit for doing exactly that. They are creating a truly unique distro. With so many distros out there that are just slightly edited versions of some other distro it is nice to see a distro trying to create a unique release.

Re:In (future) related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663163)

Well, that's pretty much what Debian, Fedora, Arch, and every other toplevel distribution does.

Re:In (future) related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663473)

Really? So if those distros are trying to be unique then why is Ubuntu catching all the shit for so-called NIHism (which is total BS)? XFCE and KDE have their own system settings application, why shouldn't Unity? Why the fuck do they have to follow whatever that failed attempt of a UI known as Gnome3 is doing?

Re:In (future) related news... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#45663239)

Good point. Many distros are just the same software repackaged, branded with a different default wallpaper and splash screen.

Re:In (future) related news... (5, Funny)

StripedCow (776465) | about 8 months ago | (#45663097)


# sudo apt-get upgrade
Extracting templates from packages: 100%
Selecting previously unselected packages.
(Reading database ... 84711 files and directories currently installed.)
Uninstalling package gnome
Uninstalling package linux-kernel
Uninstalling package X-server
Uninstalling package posix
Uninstalling package bash
Uninstalling package ext3
Installing package shuttleworth-os-almost-finished
Done
# /bin/bash: Text file non-existent
kernel panic

Re:In (future) related news... (2)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#45663243)

I'm sorry, Ubuntu experienced an internal error...

Re:In (future) related news... (3, Funny)

reikae (80981) | about 8 months ago | (#45663851)

Why do you use sudo when you're already root? :)

Re:In (future) related news... (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#45664127)

Have no mod points. Ever so sorry bout that!
Would have bestowed.
Have to be brief cause LOL!

Re:In (future) related news... (2)

chthon (580889) | about 8 months ago | (#45663247)

I think Mark Shuttleworth is a Furby (r). The one my daughter has does this also: bla, bla, bla, bla, and then something unintelligible.

Re:In (future) related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663929)

Or maybe the teacher in Peanuts [youtube.com] .

Re:In (future) related news... (1)

runeghost (2509522) | about 8 months ago | (#45663487)

It wouldn't be so funny if it weren't so true.

Tomorrows news (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about 8 months ago | (#45663027)

Canonical moving away from POSIX.

Re:Tomorrows news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663171)

Canonical moving to Windows 8.

Can anyone explain to me... (1)

waspleg (316038) | about 8 months ago | (#45663255)

Why anyone ever thought Canonical wouldn't end up being vile shit bags? I have never liked Ubuntu specifically because it has a corporation tied to it ... and being that the nature of corporations is to make money at all costs and above all else, their stupid anti-OSS decisions could and should have been foreseen at the start (yes, this is worth the karma hit from fanboys).

Re:Can anyone explain to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663337)

Is this new control center not "OSS"? /Linux user since I downloaded Slackware 1 on 3.5 floppies. Seriously.

Re:Can anyone explain to me... (2)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#45664151)

I call you a late comer. MCC on floppies, 1991.

Re:Can anyone explain to me... (1)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about 8 months ago | (#45663521)

Why anyone ever thought Canonical wouldn't end up being vile shit bags? I have never liked Ubuntu specifically because it has a corporation tied to it ... and being that the nature of corporations is to make money at all costs and above all else, their stupid anti-OSS decisions could and should have been foreseen at the start (yes, this is worth the karma hit from fanboys).

Fedora has a corporation tied to them as well. Fedora is so pro-OSS that you cannot even obtain it with built-in MP3 support. The Fraunhofer corporation (GmbH?) owns patents on critical MP3 technology and even though they've stated that it's available free for non-commercial use, Red Hat won't bundle it because it's not 100% OSS without encumbrances.

A corporation doesn't have be rapacious if it doesn't want to. Fewer of them would be if we'd all stop giving our money to the ones that are.

Re:Can anyone explain to me... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#45663999)

Why anyone ever thought Canonical wouldn't end up being vile shit bags? I have never liked Ubuntu specifically because it has a corporation tied to it ... and being that the nature of corporations is to make money at all costs and above all else, their stupid anti-OSS decisions could and should have been foreseen at the start (yes, this is worth the karma hit from fanboys).

What the heck? Almost all of the work in open source comes from companies. Linux would be a stone age operating system today if it wasn't for companies putting big bucks behind development.

nobody cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663505)

I just noticed this curious line in my /var/log/syslog file
      Dec 10 01:33:59 superhost kernel: irq ubuntu: nobody cared (try booting with the "nocanonicall" option)
It seems that the kernel is finally becoming self-aware, and it isn't happy with ubunut either!

Canonical Haters = Double Standard (1, Insightful)

Merk42 (1906718) | about 8 months ago | (#45663653)

Canonical is forking something?? NIH syndrome! They should totally use something that already exists.
Canonical is using something that already exists? How dare they use something someone else made!

Re:Canonical Haters = Double Standard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45664129)

Maybe there is more than one type of canonical haters? I certainly hate them for things other than the two you listed.

Even happier I switched (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45663735)

One year Ubuntu-free, after four years of use. Debian has yet to screw me over with opt-out advertisements and a UI that is a bad Mac rip-off.

In the words of the Twelfth Doctor, fuckity bye.

Better late than never... (1)

Almahtar (991773) | about 8 months ago | (#45664113)

Ok guys, I'm here with the asbestos!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>