Ubuntu opts for LibreOffice over Oracle's OpenOffice
christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk
Mon Jan 24 14:38:51 UTC 2011
On Monday, January 24, 2011 07:23 PM, David Sanders wrote:
> On 24 January 2011 11:19, Christopher Chan
> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>> On Monday, January 24, 2011 02:37 PM, Samuel Thurston wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Christopher Chan
>>> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>>>> Is not Lucid a Long Term Support release? I demand my LibreOffice for
>>> Don't get used to having your demands met, but...
>> Ha! If I was getting my expectations met, I would not be taking jabs at that
>> LTS/Long Term Support moniker.
>> Ubuntu is probably the only distro where a 'supported' release only gets
>> token security updates. Give me a break.
> Eh? RHEL is exactly the same. In fact it's extremely rare for *any*
> base software to be updated apart from security updates in RHEL (and
> by definition CentOS).
Excuse me but both RHEL4/Centos 4 and RHEL5/Centos 5 have had updates to
base software and more and even backports to the kernels. They are NOT
the same. To put Ubuntu on the same level of RHEL is an insult to the
intelligence of system administrators and to the level of work and
quality assurance put into RHEL.
> The big benefit of Ubuntu is that if you don't want the super-stable
> version you can just roll-up every 6 months to the latest version of
> everything. If you want bleeding-edge you can use Gentoo, and kiss
> your evenings goodbye ;-)
Bah, you call that the big benefit of Ubuntu? One can do almost the same
with Fedora. Depending on what angle you are taking, things are the same
(server environments) or better with Ubuntu (desktop environments).
In any case, both models used by Redhat and Canonical are just crap. I
thought Shuttleworth saw the light when rolling updates were mentioned.
Too bad that proved to be false. Stuff like Libreoffice can be put on a
rolling updates repo.
More information about the sounder