The Economist: Ubuntu is the source of Linux's rise
The Economist makes three technology predictions for 2008, two of which concern web surfing and the third of which concerns everyone, whether they surf the web or not. The Economist's third prediction is that the technology world will open up:
The embrace of "openness" by firms that have grown fat on closed, proprietary technology is something we'll see more of in 2008....
Pundits agree: neither Microsoft nor Apple can compete at the new price points being plumbed by companies looking to cut costs. With open-source software maturing fast, Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox, MySQL, Evolution, Pidgin and some 23,000 other Linux applications available for free seem more than ready to fill that gap. By some reckonings, Linux fans will soon outnumber Macintosh addicts. Linus Torvalds should be rightly proud.
What's most interesting about its analysis, however, is where it sees the biggest impact for open source (Linux) and why (Ubuntu):
That's largely the doing of Gutsy Gibbon, the code-name for the Ubuntu 7.10 from Canonical....Ubuntu (and its siblings Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Xubuntu) has smoothed most of Linux's geeky edges while polishing it for the desktop.
No question, Gutsy Gibbon is the sleekest, best integrated and most user-friendly Linux distribution yet. It's now simpler to set up and configure than Windows. A great deal of work has gone into making the graphics, and especially the fonts, as intuitive and attractive as the Mac's.
Like other Linux desktop editions, Ubuntu works perfectly well on lowly machines that couldn't hope to run Windows XP, let alone Vista Home Edition or Apple's OS-X.
It's good to see Ubuntu getting the credit it deserves. I'm not sure I'd credit it with the Linux boom, but what's a little hyperbole among friends?
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
You have an HP 1400 series printer. Would you like it configured for you [yes please]. Would you like to have it as your default printer [no]. Done.
Just some of the multimedia options to go, and it will be there with Windows as a desktop alternative. For servers - well, it's surpassed anything else for the last 2 years already, and is also constantly improving apace.
Ian W.
Yesterday i decided to add RHEL server 5 to my machine for exploring, the installation was nice but :
I have 2 NICs , surprisingly the RHEL server 5 recognized only one of them whereas this had never been an issue with my Ububtu which i use with the 2 cards for routing.
This is just a simple daily usage problem that represents an example of Ubuntu contribution to Linux improvements.
A new desktop I bought 6 months ago with Vista ran very poorly. My wife wouldn't use it, and continued to use the old desktop. I installed Ubuntu yesterday, and she is now using the new computer. I went from waiting 10-15 seconds for a internet page to load, to almost instant loading. I bought my mom a computer at the same time to replace her failing Win 98 computer which loaded pages really fast. She can't stand her new computer, so hers is next in line for Ubuntu. It wasn't very hard to install and looks easy to learn.
As Argued by Tom Nolle -http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=561&doc_id=141641
Czmars experience (above) is a perfect example of why Linux needs to be more user-friendly to be successful. Or to quote Tom (again)
"It?s time for the Linux community to join forces with the Internet community and show that Linux can be more than an imitator of commercial operating systems at the desktop."
The thing that keeps the American economy going is progress. People wanting something new. Sure business wants to save money. But will this savings help the end buyer of their products? I think not. The Linux community has forgotten greed. Just look at Dell. They sell a Dell with Linux for almost as much as a Windows machine. Is Linux just helping big business make more money? Sure they are.
There is no question that Redhat has done most of the heavy lifting to contribute to the cause. Fedora 8 absolutely rocks. It?s also true that Ubuntu is getting a lot of publicity and attention both from the media and the lay users.
There is no denying that Ubuntu hardware support is great (many other distribution improved a lot as well!). It?s simpler to manage and a great looker.
I have been a Netscape partner in my past life. I have gone up against Microsoft, selling Netscape browser to businesses at $75 a seat (discounted from $150) with Microsoft browser costing my clients nothing. So, I?d like nothing better than to pay back Microsoft in the same currency.
What both camps miss, however, is this: As far as a regular Joe is concerned, swapping Microsoft for Linux is not going to happen unless there is a very compelling reason to switch. The Linux community should look for the proverbial killer App. Just doing what Microsoft has already done, but free, is just not enough. The developers should ask themselves: what can we do that Microsoft can?t or won?t?
- Alex.
www.lubarov.com
Sorry, but in my experience that statement is only partially true. I've seen plenty of computers that can run Windows XP but CAN'T run Ubuntu. Sorry, but from what I've seen, Ubuntu also tends to be bloated. A better replacement for XP would be any distro with a lightweight desktop such as Xfce, Fluxbox, Blackbox, or IceWM. If you want the Ubuntu experience on an old XP computer, Xubuntu, which is Ubuntu with an Xfce desktop, would probably be a better choice. I've also noticed that some computers running XP can, interestingly enough, handle PCLinuxOS fairly well.
That said, though, there's not a doubt in my mind that Ubuntu will run rings around Vista on any computer that can run Vista. While I will agree that Ubuntu has helped raise an awareness of Linux as a viable alternative to Micro$haft, which I think is a good thing, this article sounds all the world like it was written by a die-hard Ubuntu fanboy. Sorry, but Ubuntu isn't perfect.
Fred in St. Louis
In the end I like both distributions, I am a bit more attached to Fedora, but that is simply because that is the one I learned on and have become comfortable using.
What makes Linux better than MS Windows and Mac OS is that all the competing distributions are all contribution to the innovation, development, and growth of Open Source software.
Each distribution that gets released is improving, and things are becoming easier and easier to configure. If I want to I can make my Linux distribution look visually exactly like Windows Vista or Mac OS and but the Linux distrubution will run faster, more smoothly, and more securely.
-
by ameristo
January 1, 2008 9:43 AM PST
- Being new to linux I really could not say which one is better. I did however purchase a DVD of Sabayon linux from ebay because it had a pretty impressive video of the operation and desktop enviroment, already on a DVD I could try out before installing and only 2 buck plus shipping. I also purchased a copy of PClinux from a different vendor. Well as it happens I guess the Sabayon distro got hung up in the holliday mail. I did receive and try to install the PClinux on an old Gateway laptop I had laying around, and had problems so I gave up. At this point let me say I tried Red Hat in the early 90's. I managed to get it installed on a 386 computer. It was OK but very difficult to upgrade and add applications, so I gave up on linux at that time until now and was thinking here we go again. But what the heck it only cost me 5 bucks delivered. Not wanting to throw away 5 bucks I though, I would try it on my WIFES computer an old Athalon 2600 cpu and 256Meg of ram. I popped it in and the live CD seemed to run OK. So I booted back into windows, did a disk cleanup, defrag, and all that other disk maintenance stuff to prep for install. Reboot the live disk, close my eyes, grit my teeth and hit the install icon. From here it was simple, it ask how much space I wanted to save for that other operating system. I divided the HD in half (120G total) and punched next. That was it no more interaction from me except KB, timezone, and ethernet setup. Next, next, next, done. Took all of about 15 minutes and about half the effort of XP. It installed KDE by default and I find it very intuitive and easy to use and setup. I even did an update through thier Synaptic package interface, very easy. Some of the programs and conventions are a bit strange and will take some getting used to, but nothing insurmountable. Bottom line I'm impressed and have spent more time on my wifes computer then mine. As a matter of fact I plan on installing the Sabayon distro on my computer. Then again I went back and ordered Open Suse 10.3, Fedora 8.0, and Ubuntu 7.1. Linux has really matured into a mainstream OS, I have not been this excited about an OS since Dr. DOS, and yes I tried that too. I am looking forward to writing batch files er, I mean scripts again. Like I said I don't really know which one is the best, but I am now a linux convert. Will be putting it on all my computers and suggesting it to try for friends and family.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(14 Comments)