You must log in or register to comment.
Haters are weird in the maga way.
Lubuntu > ubuntu
Ubuntu is ok. That’s it. Let them get on with their life. An OS is a tool that shouldn’t get in the way of the user of trying to achieve a goal. If Ubuntu works for them, Ubuntu is good. Linux has to be a solution, a way to a goal not the actual goal.
Sorry, there’s one thing about the OS|software|product|company|person|car that we don’t like, so we all have to glom on, downvote it to the basement and tell you why we hate it so much.
/s
Thank you for your informed opinion.
Yall wonder why the desktop Linux community hasn’t grown as much as you wish and then upvote stuff like this
The constant superiority struggles do nothing but alienate most computer users
I’m not sure that’s why.
My two cents: I got really annoyed with windows after a random update pushing stuff I don’t want or need, so I spun up Ubuntu. I’ve used a lot in the past, but stopped using it because of anti-cheat in some games, got tired of switching whenever I wanted to play.
Coming back, I find out about snaps. Not a good start, but I found instructions to revert to the good old apt packages I wanted. But then I spent way too long trying to coax the taskbar/system/clock to appear where I wanted them to, plus having things working well in my multi monitor setup, and at some point I just went back to Windows.
I couldn’t care less about distro squabbles, but I do care greatly about usability and polish, and it seems like we’re taking steps back here.
i’m with you.
there are absolutely multiple things leading to an alienation of users and distro squabbles is just one, which i agree is insignificant.
the real thing posts like this betray is the deeper pattern of disdain and coldness even toward those on the “in group.” there is virtually no sense of camaraderie or mutual respect in the community. rtfm culture and one-up-manship are something of the default here, with user experience, accessibility, and user facing documentation falling deeply into the wayside.
I tried mint; it was worse. I was like oh well, guess I’ll deal with the snaps.
It’s pretty rare hearing that Mint is worse than Ubuntu. Genuine question to just know what people may think about it: what made you think it’s worse than Ubuntu?
One immediate thing that irritated me was the process for pairing a Bluetooth keyboard was completely bugged out and it took me a while to even see where and how to enter the code. It looked like it just didn’t work for no reason at first and it took a lot of hunting to figure out that I had to enter a code.
There were other things too. Cinnamon crashed. Qt applications didn’t work in ways that were difficult to troubleshoot. Sleep seemed non-functional. There aren’t any power modes which I used to use heavily on that laptop and on and on.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing and I’m sorry to hear that it’s been what seems like a lot of trouble for you. I don’t use Mint, but it’s what I hear a lot of people recommending to new people, so I’m just curious how things have been.
Have you tried getting support from their forums?
Nah I didn’t have a lot of time to mess around with that stuff I just wanted my system to work. It’s much easier to find answers when things go wrong on Ubuntu too because it’s more popular.
That’s fair.
I switched from Ubuntu to Linux Mint and I have more issues with Linux Mint. From the top of my head :
-
Sleep simply doesn’t work. I have Mint on two different machines and both don’t work (it worked fine on Ubuntu)
-
If I do a soft reboot, it reboots to a black screen 100% of the time on both machines. I need to power cycle to reboot.
-
I need to restart Pulseaudio frequently because it starts to make white noise.
-
Cinnamon desktop environment crashing to a black screen and logging me out randomly.
I am just waiting to finish my current game to switch to a new distro because Mint isn’t working for me.
Cinnamon is so bad, even Ubuntu got rid of it, and that’s saying something.
-
Here to represent the Arch Linux master race!
lolsteamos
Distro wars are silly. If someone is happy using Ubuntu, I’m happy they’re a linux user.
Except the specific distro you use impacts your choices and the future direction and success of Linux as a whole.
If you pick the single enshittified distro then you serve to perpetuate it’s influence.
This silly infighting serves to perpetuate people staying on windows or mac os
I agree but the extent of my “silly infighting” is “don’t use Ubuntu”. If they stay on Windows instead of Ubuntu, everyone is probably better off.
it doesn’t though.
people continue to use Windows because it’s already installed.
people continue to use Ubuntu because they have brain damage and forget that Ubuntu sells your telemetry to 3rd party vendors and that Canonical is the flip-side of the Microsoft coin.
Why not use a free distro like Debian, or Arch, or Mint?
Mint especially wouldn’t take much to get used to for an Ubuntu user.
If you have a problem with any particular system, express it in a way that doesn’t denigrate its users. Some people prefer it. Some don’t have a choice.
And NEVER call anyone brain-damaged for any reason.
And NEVER call anyone brain-damaged for any reason.
even if they have brain damage?
You don’t get to speculate about that. Now drop it.
why can’t I? they obviously get to speculate about why users will run away from Ubuntu when anyone points out failures in their OS of choice.
I merely speculated that there were physiological abnormalities that may be contributing to the continued support of a corporate facsimile of Linux.
it doesn’t though.
it does
people continue to use Windows because it’s already installed.
That’s not the only reason, and it’s not the biggest reason. People pay $200 to get windows on a new computer because they’re never been exposed to anything else.
people continue to use Ubuntu because they have brain damage
This comment says a lot about your opinion, especially why no one cares about it.
Why not use a free distro
people continue to use ___________ because it’s already installed.
Let them use whatever in the hell they want. It gets them exposure that there’s life without Windows/Mac. You can hate ubuntu without gatekeeping people.
I’m not gatekeeping. they can use whatever OS they want, I’ll still mock them for using Ubuntu because it’s a sub-par OS built by a worldwide corporation that sells your telemetry to its vendors.
not to mention they force their proprietary app shitstack on their users that the Linux community at large continues to complain about.
so no, not gatekeeping, just calling out the worst parts of a corrupt shit-os.
people continue to use Ubuntu because they have brain damage
See, this is the type of uselessly disparaging dialogue that people take issue with. Why on earth did you think that this is an OK thing to say?
because it’s as true as the comment I responded to.
This silly infighting serves to perpetuate people staying on windows or mac os
You don’t think some people who consider trying linux make a web search or ask a question somewhere only to get turned off by people immediately arguing about distros and calling them brain damaged?
Right now it’s ubuntu that’s the meme target, but there’s always something like this. If everyone stopped using ubuntu tomorrow, the people who somehow get their self esteem from having a better distro will find something else to fuel that. They will never be happy
I’m happy if people use linux. I’m even happy if they use WSL or homebrew rather than plain windows or os x as it’s a gateway drug, even though having windows in particular as a base system seems needlessly painful
people who get self-esteem from a distro are fragile snowflakes.
I speak poorly about Ubuntu not because it makes me feel empowered, but because it really is a bad distro made by a terrible company.
Same as the Unix wars and Vim vs. Emacs.
What happened to Ubuntu?
It’s popular and widely used so people naturally hate it.
and also snaps
Yes, snaps are widely used so naturally people hate them too.
Who uses snaps except Ubuntu crowd?!
I use snaps on multiple non-Ubuntu systems, because they provide capabilities I haven’t been able to find elsewhere without having to manually manage updates, security issues, etc.
have you been payed by canonical to say that
No, I do that for free, because it’s a net benefit to me.
Flatpak provides similar sandboxing capabilities and you can use TopGrade to manage all updates.
Flatpak doesn’t manage system services.
forcing snaps on people (if you apt-get firefox it’ll install the snap even though you didn’t install it with snap), adding ads for it, snap having a proprietary backend, snap being essentially just a fundamentally worse version of flatpak.
the only advantage i’ve heard for snap is that it’s easier to package for.
Plus I think the advantages of stable release easy for user distros need to be immutable now, what’s the usecase for a non-immutable, stable, easy to use distro?
If you didn’t care about ease of use, you wouldn’t want immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.
If you don’t care about stability, you might not care about immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.
Ubuntu seems like a prime usecase for an immutable distro, but it isn’t for tradition-related reasons rather than it actually being good for users.
Snap is also useful for server software and it can apparently be used for more low level things such as drivers. Still, it being properiatary is enough for me to avoid it completely.
Ubuntu Core is the way Ubuntu’s doing immutability. They’ve already got tech demos of Ubuntu Core Desktop, but designing a distro around interchangeable parts with immutability and the ability to have airgapped networks that can still get updates is a nontrivial task. But it depends on things that snaps can do that Flatpak was never designed to do.
Can you explain any of those things? I’ve never understood the appeal and was just kinda hoping they’d let snap die.
Ubuntu Core works by having everything on the system, kernel included, be a snap. Or, as another way of describing the same thing, everything on the system is installed by mounting a squashfs image (which by its nature is read-only) and applying groups to the processes in those images. This applies all the way down to the level of the kernel, although a kernel snap, on install or upgrade, does write out to a boot partition.
The net result is that you get many of the benefits of immutability, but also many of the benefits of traditional distros. For example, you can replace the kernel snap (and even build your own kernel snap if you choose) without replacing the rest of the base system, since the kernel is installed separately from the base. This is especially important for non-x86 systems that may need different (mutually incompatible) kernel builds for different SOCs, but even on x86 an example of replacing parts like that is NVIDIA drivers. But you don’t need a separate version of cups just because you have an Nvidia GPU. And because cups is in its own snap, it’s isolated too. You get the same benefits of confinement that applies to desktop apps, but for services, where it can be even stricter. After all, cups doesn’t need to even know that you have a GPU, so an attack vector of hacking cups and then using it to attack your GPU gets foiled in a way that an immutable base with unconfined services doesn’t.
that is very interesting, however, why can’t that be done wth flatpak?
That’s pretty fundamentally not how flatpak works. It could theoretically be modified to do all of that, but by that point you’re recreating snapd and it would likely be easier and more straightforward to start with the current snapd and change what you dislike about it.
the problem with snap is that it’s proprietary, which really can’t be changed, and while i’m sure it would be a lot of work, what kind of work would need to be done, is really what i’m curious about.
And that’s one of the annoying things about snap: It’s fundamentally a nice system with neat capabilities but it’s spoiled by Canonical’s proprietary backend.
There was an open backend for a while. A complete lack of interest killed it.
i use cbl mariner
The fact that they changed the name to Azure Linux still upsets me. I get upset easily.
We use it at work. Seems mostly fine and similar enough to old CentOS and RHEL.
As an application author, Snaps are much easier to create than Flatpaks.
I heard this before. Is it because of its documentation?
Docs are good, but the main thing is that there are just fewer steps due to good tooling.
I use Arch btw :3
I use Kubuntu LTS. Went with
--minimal-install. Nosnapto worry about from the get-go.good tip
I mean, my distro’s technically an Ubuntu variant, but I honestly don’t think that’s ever come up in any meaningful way.
I’m yet to have an issue with snaps while using Ubuntu
Oh you mean South African Debian. Yeah that’s a popular mod, I guess.
