stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 2, Interesting) by rocks@pipedot.org on 2014-05-07 12:15 (#1EW) Over the years, I have drifted from Redhat, Gentoo, Debian and finally to Ubuntu about five years ago. I just found that Ubuntu was a reference point for many project releases even if the projects also release source code as well. I guess the latest high profile version of this is Steam on 12.04. Anyway, aside from linking Amazon to search queries which I disable, my functionality and use of Linux has not (yet) been greatly affected by Canonical's decisions with its Linux distribution and Unity window manager. I guess I don't really care where various UI elements get put at the end of the day as long as I can find them. I quite like the Dash search.That said, I remain puzzled why Canonical seems to care to fix UI elements to particular places in the first place? I am not sure what they gain from this? Re: stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 1) by billshooterofbul@pipedot.org on 2014-05-07 20:19 (#1FD) They think that removing options will reduce support costs and increase user adoption. This is the same mentality that Apple and Gnome have.I think its a terrible idea, and a waste of time and effort. If you are creating something new from scratch, then by all means limit the number of ways of doing things. But don't do it to a project that's already in the wild.While I switched off Ubuntu years before Unity existed for trivial reasons ( didn't like my DVD drive), these kinds of changes keep me from switching back, despite the widespread adoption. Re: stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 1) by zafiro17@pipedot.org on 2014-05-08 12:00 (#1FT) They're not going to have many support costs at all if they make it a distro that users don't like. I've been a SUSE guy since 2001 and I have no regrets at all not jumping onto the Ubuntu bandwagon. The only thing I really envy is apt-get (still, to this day).
Re: stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 1) by billshooterofbul@pipedot.org on 2014-05-07 20:19 (#1FD) They think that removing options will reduce support costs and increase user adoption. This is the same mentality that Apple and Gnome have.I think its a terrible idea, and a waste of time and effort. If you are creating something new from scratch, then by all means limit the number of ways of doing things. But don't do it to a project that's already in the wild.While I switched off Ubuntu years before Unity existed for trivial reasons ( didn't like my DVD drive), these kinds of changes keep me from switching back, despite the widespread adoption. Re: stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 1) by zafiro17@pipedot.org on 2014-05-08 12:00 (#1FT) They're not going to have many support costs at all if they make it a distro that users don't like. I've been a SUSE guy since 2001 and I have no regrets at all not jumping onto the Ubuntu bandwagon. The only thing I really envy is apt-get (still, to this day).
Re: stayed with ubuntu and unity (Score: 1) by zafiro17@pipedot.org on 2014-05-08 12:00 (#1FT) They're not going to have many support costs at all if they make it a distro that users don't like. I've been a SUSE guy since 2001 and I have no regrets at all not jumping onto the Ubuntu bandwagon. The only thing I really envy is apt-get (still, to this day).