2c about the development of ubuntu

[Udo 'Robos' Puetz]

On Tue, 03.01.06, Daniel Stone <daniel.stone at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Actually, Debian only supports upgrades between subsequent stable
> releases.  slink to potato to woody is supported, but slink to woody is
> not.

Well, I did something like slink -> woody a while back. But that wasn't
representive since it was on a 486 33Mhz with 256MB - HDD! But it worked...
But you a probably right - dunno.

> > If you would invest in wine (rms side of "should move to linux software
> > aside) THAT would be userfriendly because nobody would run a server app on
> > wine (who is in their right mind) but users could use a desktop program on a
> > linux desktop. The failure rate of that program would then be similar to
> > being run on windows so the transition would even be simpler for the user :)
> 
> Using Windows programs on a Linux desktop is fraught with problems, and
> is not very user-friendly at all.  It's a neat hack, but the
> Frankenstinian result is far from usable.

Well, for instance in the corporate environment - desktop wise - they have
lots of very special apps that they can't/won't port to linux. And if these
run with wine this lessens the hurdle for the adoption of linux on the
corporate desktop at least. And if you look at 
winehq.org/transgaming.org/codeweavers.com/ into their app databases you see
that already a lot of programs *work*, to various degrees certainly.

> > Killer apps for the desktop? All a machine nowadays needs is internet and
> > you are ready to go on the desktop. You *could* even use those hype-ajax
> > office thingies on the internet and forget OOo. You need a good browser and,
> > above all! Internet! See my comments about modem/isdn (<- take a look at
> > support of isdn) "it should "Just Work", TM".
> 
> Sorry, hate to break it to you, but people want to use Flash, they want

Which is at least very related to a webbrowser, hmm?

> to read their Word documents, they want to tool around in Photoshop,

fool around in Photoshop, which they probably haven't bought even. And you
can view word docs in ajax apps like I said.

> they want to play games, they want to manage their photos, they want to

flash games? ;-) and gallery.sf.net/flickr.com

> burn CDs, they want to manage their music and keep it synced with their
> MP3 player (read: iPod), etc, etc ...

Okay, these are true. 

> (This was the very top of the rather long list I compiled from the
> rather representative sample of my extended family, of whom only one is
> strongly computer-literate, and I didn't ask him anyway.)

And if you would really watch them what apps they have on their harddrive
and what they actually use you see a huge volume of wasted harddrive space...

> > > There is no such thing as Enterprise Ubuntu. There is only Ubuntu (and their 
> > > flavours like Kubuntu/Edubuntu/XFCE Ubuntu (TBD)) and a company who is giving 
> > > support to other companies.
> > 
> > See the other comments, there will be. 
> 
> I don't know what you mean by this, but the only enterprise-ish Ubuntu
> effort is the server project.  There will never -- never -- be a pay-for
> version of Ubuntu.

No, but as far as I understood ben or ante or someone there will be a server
cd. Which would classify as "Enterprise Ubuntu", at least in my eyes.
Cheers
Udo

> -- 
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
> 

-- 
Robos - 
gpg --recv-keys --keyserver blackhole.pca.dfn.de 6EEADA09