"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! 
Opinions don't represent what's really happening in the IT world: Opensource is inevitable, despite the critics.
- stmok's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
- 6285 reads
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
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
Straight to your question.
We have here a mere difference in time, that's all.
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
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
Ubuntu sells print ? More reads one way or another ?
Ubuntu is divisive, because it is Gnome desktop, pure and simple.
Even Linus will get opinionated for KDE ?
Tuxmachines loves some controversies among 500+ distros? Progress, no; emotions flare, yes. Who cares, we do. A little competition goes a long way, all for the knowledge on how to use each distro, and love it?
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
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.