Everyone let choose what those user wants to run, question is just how dificult it is to get them installed. One distribution can allow it by using a package manager, other allows only by installing from source.

Installing from source is still only universal way to install software on GNU/Linux. Binary packages are just a BONUS for easier install. Every person can install applications from source, they dont need to know how to write the code to get it application work, only thing what they need, is to run installer script what is made for easier install and they get it.

DEB and RPM should be worked more to be compatible. LSB standard defines RPM as binary mode and it can be installed to any Distribution what use DEB package format, if it is just a LSB standard compatible.

Evolution will work things out, it just takes little longer than pre-controlled marget like is on Closed source side. Only problem is like what is on Democracy, everyone has right to express own opinion, even they wouldn’t know a ***** for thing what is being voted. GNU/Linux and it’s distributions like Ubuntu, just works great. If someone dont like other than one distribution, use it!

Sorry, but it’s not clear. There are people who like to tell that “Linux based operating system” only means kernel named Linux and everything else is different and word “Distribution” is just somekind nerd t4lk and it really means “operating system”. Normal users will buy this because for them, Ubuntu with KDE or GNOME are different OS’s but they dont know that only a desktop enviroment is changed and not the OS under them. They dont know that Linux is just a kernel but whole OS is called as Linux too (even that some users use GNU/Linux).

And then these people, even about that Ubuntu “About” page, Believe that “Linux-based” just means that all those “Operating systems” (Not distributions) share only a kernel and everything else is different parts and that’s why they ain’t compatible togeher and you need to buy hardware what is made for their OS, what is Ubuntu for them.

It’s just very very hard to tell a normal fellow that the Ubuntu ain’t different OS than any other Distribution. Even that it’s different package, it’s not different OS. Reason for this comes that users believe that OS is everything what you see and you use. Like when you open OpenOffice writer, user dont use office software, they use Operating system. When they edit pictures with GIMP or they archive their pictures with F-spot, they dont use GIMP or FSPOT, they use Operating system. Normal user just dont get it that OS is under everything what they use.

And Canonical is promoting their (Like many other distribution) as complete OS. And these internet fellows, they start telling that everything what apt-repositories has, are part of OS, not part of distribution. These fellows even goes to forums “helping” people telling that Debian and Ubuntu are different OS and ain’t compatible any way. They makes flyers and posters where they promote Ubuntu as “better Linux based OS than other Linux based OS’s”

Ubuntu users are bretty much n00bs on whole community and they has learn everything from Microsoft side but when it comes to other side (Open vs Closed etc), it’s too dificult to them understand what is a “Distribution” and what is “Operating System”. And i pick up Ubuntu beacause it’s getting most new users who starts promoting same thing “This is Free OS, i dont need to buy any software or download because this OS does everything what i need”.

Problem just is that Ubuntu isn’t telling anywhere that Ubuntu is one GNU/Linux distribution among others. It’s promoting itself as Complete OS what is different than any other. And there IS THE problem.

Regarding the Ubuntu cutting off and leaving community aside and doing it a disservice etc etc that Fri13 raised-all i can say is NON-sense. If anything, Ubuntu has done the opposite by really bringing to conscious light and popular awareness Linux as an easy viable GNU/LINUX DESKTOP, yes, Linux HOME Desktop, alternative to windows and Apple.

When one goes to http://www.ubuntu.com the first thing one sees under the heading of “About Ubuntu” which is right at the top and unmissable imo is:

Ubuntu is a community developed, linux-based operating system that is perfect for laptops, desktops and servers.

Now if that is not clear i don’t know what is. Further down on the same homepage under ‘philosophy’ references to ‘Free Software’ and ‘Open-source’ make the link and identity of this linux based os further abundantly and un-avoidably clear. Where is the room for consusion?

Furthermore, i find the rant and attack unfair because the thrust of it said that the word Linux should be tagged on at the end. Then ALL Linux based distributions are guilty of this and not just Ubuntu, so why pick out ubuntu for this attack? Apart from brands like PCLinuxOS (no other ones immediately spring to mind) none of the other that i can think of like Fedora, Suse, Mandriva are called Fedora Linux, Suse Linux etc Yet, anyone interested in finding out more about Linux will find out through magazines or websites like distrowatch about the various linux flavours like the ones just mentioned. Or vice versa if they should just stumble upon the website of one particular distribution will it not become quickly clear that this suse, fedora or whatever is based on GNU/Linux?

I felt strongly the need to redress the balance on this coz imo if anything Ubuntu has been a positive force in bringing GNU/Linux to the Home Desktop market. Furthermore by stating in their mission statement that this os ‘will always be free’ and Mark Shuttleworth’s not so recent anymore al be it clear and important statement (given the context of the times with novell etc at the time) that he was not ever going to sell Ubuntu down the river by cutting deals with Microsoft he further added reassurance to the Ubuntu community and the wider linux community about the authenticity and integrity of this GNU/Linux based community driven project called UBUNTU.

Regards,

–
livingdaylight

…not since I sent him my initial email to him, at which time he commented that it was an interesting suggestion.