Jump to content

I just don't understand the attraction to Ubloatslo

vaporATX

By vaporATX,
in Thunderdome (Random Stuff)

 Share
28 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

vaporATX
vaporATX
Posted
Posted

Maybe I'm just an old Linux geek, but I just don't see why Ubuntu is so popular. I can understand why people would cut their teeth on it, but I don't understand why they stick with it and even go so far as to evangelize it. So what prompted this outburst? Well, I just got finished helping my Ubuntu using buddy fix yet another simple problem with his laptop for like the hundredth freakin' time. You know the type... he has a Ubuntu t-shirt... Ubuntu sticker on his case... probably Ubuntu underwear. Been using Ubuntu for years and years... and he STILL doesn't know jacksh*t about Linux. I understand why, too. That garbage just isn't conducive to learning because it's so friggin' confusing with config stuff spread all over and in non standard places. It's really amazing the damn thing works at all. Plus, it's so bloated and slow I can't even stand using it. We both have pretty much identical Thinkpad T61s. He runs immobile emu... or handicapped heron.. or wallowing walrus... or whatever the latest bile rising name is, and I run Arch x64. The speed difference is striking. So much so that you would think his machine was last gen celly laptop and not a speedy C2D machine. The sad part is he really wants to learn, but whenever he tries to get a handle on things he just gets confused and ends up screwing stuff up. I understand why. The Ubuntu forums are almost as disjointed and confusing as these forums. Full of newbs posting bad or out of date instructions, and the basic documentation is hideously bad. I won't even get into all of the {censored} debs and repos floating around out there. The only good thing Ubuntu ever did for him was teach him good back practices. :unsure:

 

To be fair he does have some good general Linux knowledge, but using Ubloatslo will never let him apply or further it. Oh well, one day I'll finally convince him to embrace The Arch Way and finally start enjoying linux and really using Linux instead of just doing it to be counterculture and different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
To be fair he does have some good general Linux knowledge, but using Ubloatslo will never let him apply or further it. Oh well, one day I'll finally convince him to embrace The Arch Way and finally start enjoying linux and really using Linux instead of just doing it to be counterculture and different.

 

Maybe you could simply convince him to use Debian, or a "true" Debian derivative like Parsix. Many people have done just that, and they have realized how much better than the imitation "the real thing" is.

 

But generally speaking you are right. I am simply shocked, scared even, what brainwashing can do: be it Ubuntu, be it what Governments and politicians tell people, be some utter rubbish people buy because of the ads...

My Prime Minister, by his own admission. is the most prosecuted man in the Universe. And yet he has managed to convince my fellow Italians that he is their savior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
(MoC)
(MoC)
Posted
Posted
Maybe I'm just an old Linux geek, but I just don't see why Ubuntu is so popular. I can understand why people would cut their teeth on it, but I don't understand why they stick with it and even go so far as to evangelize it. So what prompted this outburst? Well, I just got finished helping my Ubuntu using buddy fix yet another simple problem with his laptop for like the hundredth freakin' time. You know the type... he has a Ubuntu t-shirt... Ubuntu sticker on his case... probably Ubuntu underwear. Been using Ubuntu for years and years... and he STILL doesn't know jacksh*t about Linux. I understand why, too. That garbage just isn't conducive to learning because it's so friggin' confusing with config stuff spread all over and in non standard places. It's really amazing the damn thing works at all. Plus, it's so bloated and slow I can't even stand using it. We both have pretty much identical Thinkpad T61s. He runs immobile emu... or handicapped heron.. or wallowing walrus... or whatever the latest bile rising name is, and I run Arch x64. The speed difference is striking. So much so that you would think his machine was last gen celly laptop and not a speedy C2D machine. The sad part is he really wants to learn, but whenever he tries to get a handle on things he just gets confused and ends up screwing stuff up. I understand why. The Ubuntu forums are almost as disjointed and confusing as these forums. Full of newbs posting bad or out of date instructions, and the basic documentation is hideously bad. I won't even get into all of the {censored} debs and repos floating around out there. The only good thing Ubuntu ever did for him was teach him good back practices. :)

 

To be fair he does have some good general Linux knowledge, but using Ubloatslo will never let him apply or further it. Oh well, one day I'll finally convince him to embrace The Arch Way and finally start enjoying linux and really using Linux instead of just doing it to be counterculture and different.

 

Seriously, I completely agree. Ubuntu users are giant linux nubs who brag that they can boot a LiveCD and install it at the same time. WHOA! Why don't you let these idiots install real linux on some laptop with no cd drive and a PC card slot. That's a real Linux installation process, not, this mutation of Linux. Well, it's not only with installation, but with everything. You can't do anything you can do with it other than puke over the GUI. If you want Linux, names like Slackware, Arch, SuSE, and THE REAL DEBIAN is what you're supposed to be all about.

 

Just a small rant from a Linux addict :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaporATX
vaporATX
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Maybe you could simply convince him to use Debian, or a "true" Debian derivative like Parsix. Many people have done just that, and they have realized how much better than the imitation "the real thing" is.

 

But generally speaking you are right. I am simply shocked, scared even, what brainwashing can do: be it Ubuntu, be it what Governments and politicians tell people, be some utter rubbish people buy because of the ads...

My Prime Minister, by his own admission. is the most prosecuted man in the Universe. And yet he has managed to convince my fellow Italians that he is their savior.

 

I also suggested he try Suse. It's not as fast and efficient as Arch, but it is way easier to setup, and it sure blows Ubuntu away. Plus, it is well written, well documented, and very polished and professional. Also, being that it is aimed at professionals and developers it is sanely setup and conducive to learning. You can see the way to do proper advanced configurations instead of looking at configs that look like they were setup by people who were drunk, stoned, lazy, or all of the above. Ubuntu has so much depreciated cruft spread around it it'll give even a seasoned Linux guru fits. Plus, the damn thing seems to get slower and less stable with each new cute animal name.

 

Anyway, when I made that suggestion he told me that Novell is evil and in bed with Micro$oft. I asked where he got that from and... well... you can guess I'm sure. What I think p*sses me off the most is how Ubuntu is becoming synonymous with Linux in the eyes of the commodity tech press and the media. Heard some idiot on the radio the other day say how more web servers run on 'Ubuntu' than on Microsoft servers. :)

 

Seriously, I completely agree. Ubuntu users are giant linux nubs who brag that they can boot a LiveCD and install it at the same time. WHOA! Why don't you let these idiots install real linux on some laptop with no cd drive and a PC card slot. That's a real Linux installation process, not, this mutation of Linux. Well, it's not only with installation, but with everything. You can't do anything you can do with it other than puke over the GUI. If you want Linux, names like Slackware, Arch, SuSE, and THE REAL DEBIAN is what you're supposed to be all about.

 

Just a small rant from a Linux addict :D

 

I agree that the nubs are annoying, but to be fair I like that fact that distros have become more accessible to the masses. Anything that makes Balmer's pit stains grow a bit bigger is good in my book. Problem I have is that the main Linux competition that Windows has just happens to be almost as bad as Windows itself (actually worse in a lot of ways). When I think that most people trying Linux are judging it by Ubuntu it just makes me shudder. Freakin' garbage gives Linux a bad name. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
I also suggested he try Suse. It's not as fast and efficient as Arch, but it is way easier to setup, and it sure blows Ubuntu away. Plus, it is well written, well documented, and very polished and professional. Also, being that it is aimed at professionals and developers it is sanely setup and conducive to learning. You can see the way to do proper advanced configurations instead of looking at configs that look like they were setup by people who were drunk, stoned, lazy, or all of the above. Ubuntu has so much depreciated cruft spread around it it'll give even a seasoned Linux guru fits. Plus, the damn thing seems to get slower and less stable with each new cute animal name.

 

Anyway, when I made that suggestion he told me that Novell is evil and in bed with Micro$oft. I asked where he got that from and... well... you can guess I'm sure. What I think p*sses me off the most is how Ubuntu is becoming synonymous with Linux in the eyes of the commodity tech press and the media. Heard some idiot on the radio the other day say how more web servers run on 'Ubuntu' than on Microsoft servers. :)

 

All damn true. I have thought from the beginning that Ubuntu was created to destroy Linux.That is why I hate it with a passion. Which is unusual for me, in the past I have criticized Linux distributions for a shortcoming or another, but for me they were still part of the family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
(MoC)
(MoC)
Posted
Posted
Heard some idiot on the radio the other day say how more web servers run on 'Ubuntu' than on Microsoft servers. :)

 

Please no, now I'll have nightmares. That is a scary thought though. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
Problem I have is that the main Linux competition that Windows has just happens to be almost as bad as Windows itself (actually worse in a lot of ways). When I think that most people trying Linux are judging it by Ubuntu it just makes me shudder. Freakin' garbage gives Linux a bad name. :(

 

Have you noticed that Ubuntu zealots are often Vista freaks at the same time? It gives me the creeps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarkCarnival
DarkCarnival
Posted
Posted

Hmm what a rant :P

 

Well.. Concerning bloatedness, I think we should stop up a second and recognize that if there's any OS that comes with the most bloat ever, it would be OS X..

 

Jesus, even Tiger (which I used on a Macbook) was a pain to install and if you wanted just a few extra things, you'd have to install this entire EXTRA DVD making for two DVD's worth of data crammed onto the drive, for that simplistic system alone. Now that, is bloat :P

 

Ubuntu on the other hand, is a single 700mb CD which compared to two entire DVD's isn't too much. Seeing as you use Arch, I think you must be comfy enough with Linux to remember the old Redhat / Debian /SuSE / Fedora releases of up to 6-7 CD's where you'd easily end up using 3-4 of the CD's just to do their respective base installs -- that, is bloat :P

 

Again, we have Windows Vista, which I'm pretty sure is also loaded onto a DVD. Again, more bloat :P

 

 

Now, I will concede, that Ubunu makes a lot of choices for the user straight off the bat, but not any more than the competing OS's do (again, Tiger and Vista) and it's certainly not as bloated as either of them.

 

That said, I recently jumped from Ubuntu over to Arch. I actually stuck with Ubuntu since its beginning since it matched the speed I was seeing in Slackware and the ease of use from Debian along with more recent software usually found in only Fedora which was a bit too unstable for my liking.

 

But I just think you're like me, you like to start out with a quite minimalistic system, you've probably been in love with either Slackware or something else that was simple and with Arch you've found the unification of that simplicity with a strong package manager which does both binary installs and ports-like compiles.

 

But truthfully, I don't think you can expect every human on the planet to find it fascinating to start off with a 240'ish MB core ISO which dumps you into a curses interface and from there into either nano or vi. I don't know why, but people seem scared of vi :D

 

 

Anyway, to end it off. To me Ubuntu still handles package management heaps better than Fedora (which has been basically broken ever since Red Hat reformed it into their personal testbed for their enterprise suite) and somewhat better than SuSE which, apart from being a nice system, is plagued by a slow and fragmented way of handling packages.

(As in, the offical tool is horribly slow and outdated and their third party tools feel like watered-down synaptic.)...

 

If SuSE embraced apt-rpm I would recommend it to people, until then I'll have to say Ubuntu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaporATX
vaporATX
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Maybe because the other distros suck at advertising?

 

Plus, you have to have a livecd so the nubs can download it, boot it up on mommy's dell sh*t-box, take a screenie, and post "OMG!!! I'M RUNNING <insert ubuntu clone> I'M SOOOOOO 133t!!! WINDOZ sux0rz!!!" on the WoW forums as many times as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fatshitcat
fatshitcat
Posted
Posted
Suse's package management is really fast now -_- Its loads up in a second and when the repos refresh once in a while it takes around 12 to 20 seconds for me and thats it, huge improvements from 10.3 and 10.2.

 

If talking about bloat, don't forget (open)SUSE's YAST. I thought they would sort it out by 11.0, but it's still a pain in the :blink: . And package management is ages worse compared to APT/Synaptic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaporATX
vaporATX
Posted
  • Author
Posted
If talking about bloat, don't forget (open)SUSE's YAST. I thought they would sort it out by 11.0, but it's still a pain in the :) . And package management is ages worse compared to APT/Synaptic.

 

Problem with apt (especially on Ubuntu) is that anybody and his mother can put up a repo with whatever unstable, dangerous, or insecure garbage they want and post a link to it on some 'buntu forum. Even the main sanctioned repos are full of buggy garbage. The peer review system Arch uses for it's main package databases is so far superior to this it's not even worth discussing. Hell, even the damn testing database has more stable and better made stuff than Ubuntu's main repos... and a hell of a lot more up to date. Arch approches FreeBSD in stability and community dev quality and is a hell of a lot more bleeding edge. AUR is also very well stocked by the community and the packages are of high quality, but you don't even have to take that risk because updated stuff ends up in the main package DB so fast. Plus, you can be assured that once it gets there it will have been thoroughly debugged and tested. Sorry, but Ubuntu is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
If talking about bloat, don't forget (open)SUSE's YAST. I thought they would sort it out by 11.0, but it's still a pain in the :) . And package management is ages worse compared to APT/Synaptic.

 

Which YaST GUI do you use, QT or GTK?

I suggest you try both. Personally I find the GTK module of Software Management sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
(MoC)
(MoC)
Posted
Posted
Plus, you have to have a livecd so the nubs can download it, boot it up on mommy's dell sh*t-box, take a screenie, and post "OMG!!! I'M RUNNING <insert ubuntu clone> I'M SOOOOOO 133t!!! WINDOZ sux0rz!!!" on the WoW forums as many times as possible.

 

I agree 100% because THATS ALL THEY DO!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fatshitcat
fatshitcat
Posted
Posted
Which YaST GUI do you use, QT or GTK?

I suggest you try both. Personally I find the GTK module of Software Management sucks.

 

It was the QT version.

 

And about LiveCDs, I have to agree with VaporATX, but the ability to ex. use Firefox while your OS is installing is a nice touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
snakeeyes
snakeeyes
Posted
Posted
Which YaST GUI do you use, QT or GTK?

I suggest you try both. Personally I find the GTK module of Software Management sucks.

 

Yeah I think the gtk software management sucks as well, but I have read somewhere as a post from another user that it was built on the gnome philosophy or something like that which I think is:

 

"Too many buttons confuse the user"

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
Yeah I think the gtk software management sucks as well, but I have read somewhere as a post from another user that it was built on the gnome philosophy or something like that which I think is:

 

"Too many buttons confuse the user"

 

:)

 

 

:( But too few options drive the user mad as well. That is why somebody who reviewed 11.0 using the GNOME LiveCD felt that the package management was still poor.

Personally I perform many tasks with CLI Zypper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
snakeeyes
snakeeyes
Posted
Posted
:( But too few options drive the user mad as well. That is why somebody who reviewed 11.0 using the GNOME LiveCD felt that the package management was still poor.

Personally I perform many tasks with CLI Zypper.

 

I think there is a way to use the kde version of yast on gnome, I just can't seem to find that post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vaporATX
vaporATX
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Personally I perform many tasks with CLI Zypper.

 

Zypper is excellent.

 

I just don't understand this need people have for GUI package management? Lets look at some examples here:

 

Windohs --> Download the program... start the installer... agree to a software license that give the company rights to everything short of your mortal soul... click through a bunch of confusing options... run your spyware scanner to remove all the adware and spyware the program installed... start the program and hope it doesn't crash or frag you entire OS.

 

Mac --> Download the program... drag it to the apps folder

 

Linux GUI package manager ---> Start the package manager... type your password... search for the program... select it for install... apply

 

Linux CLI --> sudo <package manager> <program foo>

 

Quite clear to me what is easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
I think there is a way to use the kde version of yast on gnome, I just can't seem to find that post.

 

From the openSUSE Forums, by buckesfeld:

 

Yast, System, /etc/sysconfig Editor:

System, Yast2, GUI

WANTED_GUI and WANTED_SHELL need to be set to "qt"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
snakeeyes
snakeeyes
Posted
Posted
I just don't understand this need people have for GUI package management?

 

I know people who change the location of the task bar in windows, they would be surprised if they found out it was capable of moving at all.

 

Just imagine what will happen to them if they have type in something in the terminal to install a package. :)

 

There r still some people around who think that installing windows on a mac means u get no viruses cause the mac just creates an artificial layer of protection -_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...