Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

"Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks"...Why care?

What the heck am I talking about? Here's the articles in question.

Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 1: Search
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil.html

Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 2: Compiz Fusion
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil_1.html

Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 3: X11
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil_2.html

Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 4: Applications
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil_3.html

Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 5: Epilogue
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil_4.html

These are clear cut cases of how to make money for your IT/tech news company. The tactic is becoming very old, but for some reason, most people fall for it! (Tech columnist John C Dvorak is well known for doing it to Apple fans!)

So how does it work?

(1) Get someone who is intentionally biased to write.

In this case of the above articles, Randall Kennedy. Clearly anti-Linux and Pro-Microsoft. Don't believe? Check his past articles and you'll see a general pattern. (Notice how those who are biased ALWAYS say they aren't? They even go the extra mile by saying they use those products that they knock down on. LOL! They can try the sympathy card, but it doesn't work on me. Their words over time are clear and intentional. They are BIASED.)

(2) Write headlines that delibrately spark controversy.

That's right! Delibrately start crap and attract attention! This is the bait, so watch out for it!

(3) Leave a backdoor for yourself.

This varies from author to author. Some intentionally write with a "nothing to lose" attitude. Others will retract later on. Depends on mood and how much ad money they want to make.

(4) Stretch it out.
Make it multi-part! (Like in this case).
OR
Write a retraction article at later time.

The more its stretched out, the more people will return! Which means? Ad money!

Notice how in this case, this attempt by Randall Kennedy is quite childish? You'd think a grown man in the tech industry would come up with some good, logical complaints. Nope, you won't see that. Why? Because they're desperate to attract attention. Its their job. They're paid to BS. (like marketing spinners of a certain corporation we're all so fond of!)

If the human race was categorized as a file system, people like him, Paris Hilton, etc would be under /tmp. They get attention for a bit, then its gone after a reboot, and no one gives a crap.

So how do you counter this?

(1) Just ignore it.
That's right. Ignore it. What? You can't? Why not? I don't see anyone pointing a gun to your head, do you? What happens when you ignore it? You'll be far less agitated, that's for sure! Why add more stress to your life when you don't need to?

(2) Learn to meditate.
To become a true master in life, one must master your emotions. Learn to be mindful. Their words are just words. Are they gonna stop you from using Linux? (or whatever you do in your life?). Of course not! The most basic form of meditation is the breathing one. As mentioned here: http://www.fast-stress-relief.com/breathing-meditation.html

(3) Don't waste your time responding to their feedback.
Why do you need to defend Linux from these jerks? Why? What happens when you don't? Will Linus and the gang, RedHat, Novell, Canonical, etc die or give up? Nope. They will continue coding and keep doing what they do.

(4) Block how they generate their money.
This is what I do sometimes if a website really annoys my web browsing experience. If you use Firefox, Adblock or Adblock Plus is the way to go.

In the above article case of infoworld.com, add these to Adblock:
=> *edgeio.com/*
=> *quantserve.com/*
=> https://mt.infoworld.com/*.*
=> *doubleclick.net/*
=> *adsonar.com/*
=> http://www.infoworld.com/script/ads/*.*

What can they do if you block their stream of income? Absolutely, positively NOTHING. They'll go broke? That's too bad for them, isn't it? Hey, life is tough. I don't complain about the weather, I do something about it.

I also apply the same methods to authors like Thom Holwerda of OSNews.com, George Ou of ZDNet.com and of course, John C Dvorak of pcmag.com.

Remember, they're just opinions with the intention to stir emotion in order to profit. They can express them as much as they want. Doesn't mean we have to listen to them or read their work! Wink

Opinions don't represent what's really happening in the IT world: Opensource is inevitable, despite the critics.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

against facts there can't be objections

In my opinion, your "ignore it" toolkit is far more ridiculous than the slandering texts it targets.
As a matter of fact, Ubuntu does suck and is causing GNU/linux more damage than any anti-Linux FUD.
I really don't care much about his bias as i care about such a buggy piece of nothingness (Ubuntu) being the most hyped distro ever. Regrettably the main entrance to desktop Linux these days... and not exactly because it deserves, but because it can AFFORD it.

"Will Linus and the gang, RedHat, Novell, Canonical, etc die or give up?"

Novell????????
This is obscene.

Re: against facts there can't be objections

Hmmm. Interesting interpretation.

Do you want to know why I say "ignore it"?

Simple. Opensource doesn't stop improving. While I agree Ubuntu is a bit hyped, you can call any distro buggy. Hell, you expect it. As it is all part of the process of the development model. But you can also expect things (with time) to get better. Just compare the distros from 2005 and today. (So what was it? Ubuntu 5.04 vs 7.10?). You see there have been distinct improvements.

Things improve despite what critics say. And as with life, critics will always be there when something or someone gets popular. They'll keep pointing things out, and someone on the dev team of that distro will eventually notice and do something about it. And that's one of the keys...Constant improvement.

What I'm saying is, the rest of us shouldn't be so worked up over nothing. Its not a dire or life threatening situation, is it? Will there be a tomorrow if today's bug isn't fixed? Of course there is. We have time, Microsoft doesn't.

As for Novell. Yeah, they have slept with Microsoft in that patent covenant and you do have the right to be angry, but they've also tried to do some good.

Assisting in ripping apart SCO, played a role in bringing eyecandy for the Linux desktop with XGL/Compiz, as well as the development of the R500/R600 open driver for ATI/AMD video cards.

I would classify them as a party who is in it for themselves, but deep down inside, has some heart of the community. I don't expect to count on them all the time, but when a situation is in the crapper, they will step up to the plate and help out.

Think Novell as "Lando Calrissian" in The Empire Strikes Back.

a general evolution pattern, nothing else

stmok wrote:
Hmmm. Interesting interpretation.
Just compare the distros from 2005 and today. (So what was it? Ubuntu 5.04 vs 7.10?). You see there have been distinct improvements.

Which is almost none, my friend. At least when it comes to what could be Ubuntu specific features. None, nothing. This is what i find more unbearable about the Ubuntitis plague. The king walks naked and everyone refuses to see.
Since October 2004, when i 1st downloaded Ubuntu, the improvements added can be fond in ANY living Linux distro, simply because the Kernel has evolved, X has evolved, the desktops have evolved... Ubuntu 7.10 is at most a regular up to date rebranding of a pure breed Debian, no more and no less. It reflects the state of art in terms of general GNU/Linux development as of now, without any added value (unless you count artwork as a feature:)).
Actually, the funny thing about Ubuntu lies more on what it is NOT, rather than what it is Smile

Straight to your question.
There is a difference between the 1st Ubuntu release and the latest.
The first was a shameless hijack of debian repositories (politely called "fork")), this one looks like a hijack of debian as well Smile We have here a mere difference in time, that's all.
Of course, all branded and packaged in fancy cd/dvd cases and overhyped by the only functioning department at Canonical, Marketing and PR.

Tuxmachines should just stop posting this fraud/flamebait crap

If something is so obiviously biased and flamebait it really has no value to anyone.
Life is short, concentrate on good journalism and dont drink cheap booze Wink

I hate it when 'buntu

I hate it when 'buntu fanboys act as if 'buntu IS Linux. In point of fact, there's an article on the TuxMachine's main page titled: "Share a Firefox Profile Between Ubuntu and Windows". This sharing depends upon a Linux distro's ability to read and write to NTFS partitions--a capability which is supported by nearly all Linux distros, not just the 'buntus.

But, Infoworld's Randall Kennedy articles are just ridiculous. I read the one where he's comparing Aero to Compiz Fusion. They come out about equal in my estimation: Aero's massive hardware requirements vs Compiz Fusion's immaturity.

Both are toys at this point. What amazes me is that Microsoft, with all its resources, couldn't come up with something better, faster, and less resource consumptive than Aero. Five years and over 5 billion dollars spent and MS comes up with an OS like Windows Vista and Aero. Now, that's pathetic.

I won't waste my time reading the other parts of Kennedy's multipart diatribe.

Quote:I hate it when 'buntu

Quote:
I hate it when 'buntu fanboys act as if 'buntu IS Linux.

Me too. But the points this guy's made in his "Ubuntu sucks" rant, so far, actually have nothing to Ubuntu, and could apply to just about any modern Linux distro using GNOME as a WM. So evidently he doesn't know the difference between Ubuntu and Linux either.

(And so far his gripes are pretty lame ones.)

(PC Mag's columnist John Dvorak recently took some pot shots at open source in general.)

Complain, complain, such negative people.

Linux as a whole is an awesome O/S and I much, much prefer it to the Windows workstation and servers that I use at work. No it's not perfect, as imperfect people we will never write a perfect O/S. Just some work better than others. And probably all of us will have different opinions of what "better" is and means, and thusly will like or dislike different distributions for whatever reasons. Good for each of you, you're human. Isn't it great to have a choice?!

I personally love Ubuntu, I have 6.06, 7.04 and 7.10 all running on different machines and plan on continuing to use them. I personally don't have any use for XGL/Compiz, it's cool looking, but I turned it back off. I just need a workstation and server that works, and mine do what I need. I need something that requires minimal intervention to keep working, easy patching, easy upgrading. Ubuntu does that for me.

I'm indebted to Canonical and all the Ubuntu family, great job, keep up the good work!

I hope you all are as happy with whatever you use as I am with mine.

PK

The worst thing I've ever read

The problem for me is that by the time I realize that this is happening, I've already given the offending site a dozen hits.

This was just terrible. A bias is forgiveable, everybody's got one, but this guy isn't even bothering to come up with some misleading facts.

I like the adblocking idea. I let them know I'd be doing that.

Did anyone notice that the

Did anyone notice that the guy works for Microsoft?

Randall C. Kennedy is the Director of Research for Competitive Systems Analysis and Contributing Editor to the InfoWorld Test Center. A 20 year IT veteran (his client list includes Intel, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard and IBM), he specializes in enterprise desktop computing technologies and issues.

This really puts the whole thing in perspective for me. The whole thing is too just chickenshit to get upset over.

Why InfoWorld (Still) Sucks - Part 1: Editor(s)

haha, I had to do it. He is still at it, and his latest one is worse than the rest. It is more of an attack towards all applications for Linux, however the editor throws Ubuntu in it as if it is our fault. However, I think the best reading is the comments. I swear, some of them I can picture the commentor actually crying as they type the post. And you can tell who is either an American or one of the LUGRadio guys in disguise with all of the F words being thrown around. Here are just a couple snippets of my favorites quotes:

Rest Here

re: infoworld

What rock did these yahoo's crawl out from under? Infoworld has been around for decades, and is known (and trusted by every IT shop I've ever worked with) for their extremely accurate white papers and test center reviews.

But hey, this is Linux we're talking about, so lets not look at the real problems (for a detailed list, read almost any of Beranger's rants), lets just apologize for them, sweep them under the rug, and promise that everything will be oh so much better in the next release (or for sure, in the release after that, or maybe with the next gnome/kde release, or when reiser gets out of jail, or something about hell and cold weather, or when the magic 8 ball clears up, etc., etc.).

re: re: infoworld

While I'm not suggesting sweeping bugs and problems under the carpet, its just immature to see a website like Infoworld promote this kind of behaviour. As you conveyed, they have a reputation that is supposed to be professional in the IT world.

How does this reputation do when they pull out articles with this kind of childish tone? Its far from professional, that's for sure. It has the tone of a 15yr old troll.

Think about it.

If the author made proper constructive criticisms and made some sort of suggestion to the problems he experienced, Linux people (or more like the Ubuntu fanbase) wouldn't be so, eh, "enthusiastic" or "passionate" about it. Maybe someone in the community would pick that up and do something about the issues.

But no, this author is a paid crap starter. His job is to start crap. His tone and his motives are intentional. He is paid to get people all riled up. He uses people's emotions to generate money. That's how pathetic it has become.

When it comes down to it, its a question of integrity. And the fact that the author of those articles has none. It also falls back to infoworld.com in general. How is one supposed to trust a source of information when this type of garbage comes out of it?

You can't trust something or someone when they don't have any form of core values or integrity. Otherwise, you're just gonna be hurt again.

Did you read these

Did you read these articles?

Infoworld may have been reputable, but its reputation just took a hit. There are certainly valid criticisms to be made of Ubuntu (I'm not a fan) and even of Linux in general, but this author doesn't know enough about Linux to address them. It wasn't that it was biased (everybody's biased) it's that these particular articles were so uninformed and half-assed that it was insulting to all concerned.

He just doesn't know anything about Linux, and I find it offensive that he doesn't think it matters. My favorite example is when he describes the Gimp as "photoshop on acid". What the hell does that mean? He doesn't say. He just moves on to make a dumb predictable joke about fspot's name. He never gets down to specifics, apparently, because he doesn't know any specifics. The first two articles aren't even about Ubuntu. He describes Vista's features at length, and even a You Tube Video.

It's all just crap. Excrement.

one of those was mine.

glad you liked it.

OH, GUESS WHAT? IT WAS ALL A JOKE!!!

HA HA!

Douchebag.

re: joke?

I find that even more reprehensible than the original concept. At least one can agree or disagree with an opinion on an OS. At least it was a valid opinion, whether or not it was a popular opinion or not. It was an honest opinion - or so we thought. Now on Friday he wants to embarrass the whole Linux community by saying, "Oh, I was just testing. I was just baiting you into making a fool of yourself." He's more of a dick now than ever. At least I could respect someone who had the balls to stand up to the rapid fanbois by declaring their OS sucks, only to find out he was lying to and manipulating the community afterall.

I didn't even consider blacklisting him just because he said Ubuntu sucks despite pleas to do so. I might try to remember his name now though. He lost all of his integrity with me. Slimeball journalism. As stmok said, "just to get ad dollars."

I'm still blocking their

I'm still blocking their ads.

More than anything else, it

More than anything else, it offends me to see this unprincipled rascal describe some maniac racist flamer as "the *true* face of the Linux Community." He said that, in so many words, in explaining his actions. That alone, without the cruel manipulative trickery, places him beneath contempt. We thought he was attacking Ubuntu, but he was attacking us. Now don't we feel silly for getting all bent out of shape?

Read the comments to Kennedy's articles carefully. You'll see some bad language (I always assume that if they want to keep that out, they certainly can), you'll see attacks on Kennedy's journalistic integrity (were we wrong?) but you certainly won't see any racial epithets, and I don't think you'll see many of the low personal attacks that are the essence of true flaming. Kennedy will pretend that he was able to trick us into giving him what he wanted, but overall, that's just another one of his lies.

Re: OH, GUESS WHAT? IT WAS ALL A JOKE!!!

The thing with jokes is often the one of intent and purpose.

The reason for Randall Kennedy's "flame bait" articles was to make a point about how crazy, passionate, etc Linux people (or community) are.

Mr Kennedy's approach is like this:

(1) Hypothesis: Bees are bad and they can cause pain.
(2) Find a bees nest in a tree.
(3) Get a stick and poke it until it falls to the ground.
(4) Bees start attacking.

Conclusion? Bees are bad and they cause pain.

Question is, do you blame the bees for being so pissed off OR the person who poked the nest?

It sounds stupid, but that's exactly what Mr Kennedy did with his articles.

By their very nature, bees (like Linux folks) aren't hostile unless threatened or provoked. Once you poke a nest, don't expect nothing to happen.

re: it was all a joke

I mean exactly. If he was wanting intelligent discourse he wouldn't have picked such a flametory title (and subject). It's almost guaranteed to start a riot saying anything un-Ubuntu.

Also, the last article could have been a cop out. Perhaps due to all the response he decided he'd say, "oh just kidding" because he and his editor thought about the public relations nightmare he started. "Uh-oh, look at all the people we've offended - that might cut into the ad dollars."

In either case, that's the kind of unprofessionalism you'd expect from a blogspot or wordpress address - not infoworld. It's just unacceptable.

My latest post to Kennedy's Blog (Yes I'm blocking the ads)

Now that I'm no longer angry, I'm wondering if anyone is up for a discussion...

I want to raise two points.

1. Overall, the most obnoxious members of any group are often the most visible by definition. This goes for conservatives, liberals, christians, muslims, feminists, tv preachers... you name it. You should always be careful about judging a whole community, ANY community, by the few who push themselves into your field of vision at the slightest provocation. Needless to say, this was not a "slight" provocation.

I no longer feel the need to respond to Mr. Kennedy. I think he owes us an apology, and if we get it, I'll stop blocking the ads from this site. But he either knows he went too far, or will never know. And I don't want to presume to know his motives. Is he a paid troll for Microsoft? Not necessarily. Is he someone who doesn't understand Linux? Frankly, from this series of articles, there's no way to tell. So it isn't to Mr. Kennedy in particular that I address the following.

To me, this whole business about "Linux Fanbois" seems like a Karl Rove tactic. Karl Rove made it a practice to attack political enemies for their strengths. Any Corporation, and this includes Microsoft, would kill for the kind of "brand loyalty" Linux enjoys. How do you turn a powerful asset like a fiercely loyal user base into a liability? With caricatures of basement-dwelling losers, and diminutive epithets like "fanbois". (That spelling makes me want to give a French Pronunciation... "fan-bwah")

Occam's razor suggests that the most logical reason for Linux's loyal fan base is a good product... not that IBM, the U.S. Military, and those behind the international space station are all losers living in their parents' basements.

Again, I don't want to assign sinister motives to Mr. Kennedy. Having scolded him for a week now, I think we ought to step back, and give him the benefit of the doubt. It may be that he really is so lacking in imagination that he associated 10 million Linux users with a handful of boorish emails he received once. Once you've seen his photo on the website, that becomes more plausible.

More in Tux Machines

Will New Google Android Live TV Outfox Apple?

Google then rolled out its $35 Chromecast dongle, a streaming device, in mid-2013. Google's new Android TV operating system is expected to make it easier for software developers to move apps from mobile devices to TVs. Read more

Q4OS Is a Windows-Lookalike OS That Now Comes with LXDE and Xfce as Well

Q4OS, a Linux distribution built to offer a similar experience to Windows XP, is now featuring a couple of extra desktop environments that should provide some more options for users who want a different look. Read more

today's howtos

Leftovers: Gaming