Hate to nitpick but I felt as this enlightenment was called for :)

” Even the humblest Windows users will go online to install Winzip, or 7zip, or Winrar to unzip folders, they will also many times download and install iTunes to manage their music and Picasa to manage their photos. Not to mention Windows Live Messenger, that might be the most common.”

What rubbish. My parents wouldn’t have a clue about winzip et. al, nor what they do. Neither do they have any interest in iTunes or Messenger etc. A PC is merely a tool to perform a task like writting letters, sending emails and so on.

You appear to be speaking from the usual technologist point of view: you assume that everyone is as capable as you are. I’d suggest the majority of PC users aren’t technical at all, hence the sheer prevelence of viruses, phishing scams, malware etc.

I think that there is some misinterpretation here. It’s not about the linux crew being able to take criticism, it’s about the quality of the article Rory wrote. This article is poor, if you read it, most of the stuff he criticized were plain misconceptions. He complained that the flash didn’t work, but it installs exactly like on windows, at least on karmic koala (trust me on this one). And the software for organizing the media he wanted is just different. These factors don’t make linux an inferior OS. What I would agree that makes inferior is the office suite. Microsoft still has the best Office as of yet (even though they scrambled 2007 so much) – oh you wouldn’t imagine the woes of my clients that completely lost the functionality of some formulas that *used* to work on MSO but don’t work on OO, upon the linux migration that was imposed.

According to what I read on your post though, Christopher Smart appears to have made a reasonably well founded article, whereas Rory didn’t, and that is, in my humble opinion, the point.

Ed.

Christopher Smart wrote a couple of articles in Linux Magazine about the new Ubuntu release. The first one, entitled something like “Ubuntu, Stop Making Linux Look Bad” ticked a lot of people off and he then wrote the second article to smooth the feathers he had ruffled.
I’m of the opinion that most of the people who got bent out of shape at his first effort never made it beyond reading the article title. The criticism was, actually, quite valid and insightful. Unfortunately, any kind of criticism of Ubuntu- insightful, valid, or otherwise- is not welcomed by too many people. They act as though you had called their wife an ugly old troll.
The second article Mr. Smart wrote was not at all apologetic for offending anyone. Instead, he reiterated and then expanded upon his original feelings that Ubuntu Karmic was a disservice to users and prospective users of Linux, in general, and Ubuntu, in particular. He then went on to explain how it happens that Ubuntu tends to ignore its LTS releases and kick un-refined regular releases out the door in less than polished condition. His explanations are, by no means, excuses for these practices, merely explanations that many people have never given consideration to.

I’m afraid I am unable to brag about how long I’ve been using some form of Linux, as so many of you are apt to do. But I don’t believe that your longevity or my brevity makes you necessarily correct or me incorrect. And even in my relatively short use of Linux, I can not deny this fact: Linux is not ready for prime time use to the majority of computer users. It requires more work and creates more frustration than the “average user” is willing to tolerate.
I don’t mean to insinuate that Linux was ever intended to be a contender for most used operating method, but I can tell you that until a tremendous lot more work is done, it cannot be.

I absolutely understand you. Nobody likes bad publicity and it is sometimes difficult to deal with. But the problem here really is with Canonical asking him to look at Ubuntu in the first place on such short notice. Well – anyway – I hope the lesson is learned and that Canonical will do a better job next time.

Publicity like this is extremely valuable (given the “right” outcome) and all the commercial players have people dedicated to work on getting their products in there. It has nothing to do with paying, I know a lot of journalists that would be really offended and tend to really dig for problems if someone tried to buy their way in. But staying in touch with a journalist on a regular basis, getting to know them, feeding them real news (not just the standard company line) to build a relationship is something that really pays off in the long run. And plan for a test waaay into the future. As I said, now is a good time to start working on a test for the 10.04 release.

To Canonical: Why not get in touch with Rory again and say “We would like to do something next year, a different kind of review” and then put Rory as a part of a group of 10 people. All of them totally new to Ubuntu, but with enough knowledge to install Windows on their computers. This is a good level to start at. Do the pre-installed group at a different point. Have an install party and follow each of them over a period of two weeks to find out how they are doing.

Regarding the view of Ubuntu and other Linux distros: When you mention this, you should take a look at the Ubuntu forum. How many of the advices you see there recommend using the CLI to fix problems when there are perfectly good ways to do it using the GUI? The reputation of Linux as a CLI monster is well deserved in my opinion. If you really want this to change, then stop telling people to use the CLI when guiding newbies. Someone wrote a blogpost about being a CLI snob. That was pretty interesting. If the community want to be a including community, don’t tell people that if they want any help they just have to get with the programme and do as they are told. There is way too much hatred, arrogance and hostility in almost any Linux forum. Be polite with people, even if they disagree with your ideals.

And by you, I do not mean you personally. Your replies here, Edgar, has been the kind of replies I wish everyone would use. Calm and reasonable. If all comments in the community was like this, the general view of Linux would be much different. I know many people that has been scared away because of the hostility they have met. And that makes me sad.

Allow me to humbly disagree, and, please take into consideration that I really appreciate your point of view, it’s a valid one, and you explain it better than most people would, which in turn makes it easy to agree with you – to a point.

I agree that it is important that Ubuntu is mentioned in an information hub like BBC. I like that it gets attention. But what Ubuntu got is the wrong kind of attention, it was quickly dismissed as a nasty experience, to be avoided by people that unlike us don’t have the time, curiosity and know how to fiddle with Linux. And that is wrong, today Ubuntu is so close to windows that it astonishes me, it’s just so different from what it was 10 years ago, and yet people still only see it portrayed as a dark and gloomy CLI, used only by hunchback, thick glassed, greasy geeks.

Should we be glad for this very wrong misconception being brought up again? I think not, I think it looks as though linux is stuck in time.

I agree that whinning doesn’t look good, and that is why I avoided “public” comments (seeing as this is a pretty much *nix environment), but it does get to me that after so much changed in so little time people still gawk at linux as if it were something outrageously inefficient.

If he didn’t have time to do a proper review, he should respectfully ask Canonical to do the test some other time, when he’d be able to do it decently.
And that I think is the point. Publicity yes! But bad publicity no, thanks but no.

Hope you don’t take anything personally mate, but this kind of narrow minded person gets under my skin.

You are right, if we should stick as close to the topic as possible, that is the whole point you and the others here are missing. Seems I am the only one differing here. maybe it is because I use Kubuntu and not Ubuntu (nah – just kidding :-D )

Rory did not do a real test or review of Ubuntu at all! He was polite, as anyone would be, when someone from Canonical called him and asked him to look at Ubuntu. He actually managed to fit it in for 24 hours! And this was the stupid thing done by Canonical. They should have waited and offered him a CD and a blank PC for a serious test later.

Rory’s mention of Ubuntu was a pure “Oh, BTW – there is something called Ubuntu..” moment. He could have left it out totally, and nobody would have noticed. But he did mention Ubuntu. And you guys are whining about it. Be happy that he mentioned it. Smile, we got yet another mention.

And then offer the man to do a real test. I am sure his schedule is pretty full as anyone in TV these days. To get a program on air takes planning at least 6 months ahead. Seriously. Someone has to get their marketing skills right. Contact Rory now and schedule a test for April or May next year. Do a 7 day or 14 day test. Then you might even get someone from Canonical in the studio to demonstrate Ubuntu before he go on with his review.

If the demo person is smart, he will then make sure he covers all the bad points Rory mentioned WITHOUT saying anything about his 24 hour test and just mention briefly that “this has been in the system for more than 6 months”.

Whining looks bad. And right now, a lot of Windows users see a community of Ubuntu users that don’t have anything else to do than whine about getting their favourite OS mentioned by someone from BBC.

When you get bad critique, do something about it. Don’t whine about it. then you keep the attention alive, and that is something you do not want. Let it die. Finish with it. Forget it. Move on.

Sure we can argue whether in specific software types it’s still not as advanced as proprietary software or not is a different discussion, this man failed at simple tasks in Ubuntu, and the worst part is that it made Ubuntu (not to mention linux all together) look like a stoneage OS.

What he said is “ok it’s fast, but too hard”. He found it hard to organise media, in an OS that already includes software for that purpose, unlike Windows, where you have to download and install.

What can you call that other than a biased review?

Philippe:
“At least let us know what a self-proclaimed video expert can reliably say about video editing software comparison.”

First of all, I am not a self-proclaimed video expert. Other people tell me that. I also do it for money – that means professionally.

Now “pro-level” is kind of a vague term. The only multitracker that run on linux that can be considered pro is probably Cinellera – and it very limited. Sure it does a good job at what it can do, but it is basic and awkward.

I’ve been using Linux since 1995. I’ve been filming and editing since 2004. So I think I have a pretty good grip on the subject. I do proclaim that the multimedia applications that run on Windows and Mac are much more advanced than the ones that run on Linux. You may find one or two exceptions. But generally, professionals pay for their software. So of course it gets developed further. That being said, I prefer Inkscape to any vector app. Blender is my favorite 3D app. I think those two do not have much competition from commercial apps.

Oceanwatcher:
“The holy grail is not operating systems. It is the applications running on top of it.”
“I really do not care if it is FOSS or not. The FOSS politics part is something I do not want to poke even with a 10 foot pole.”

That might be for you. However, there are some of us who do computing. We like to compute things. We need to make various “machines” quickly. They need to work well and be understood easily. The system needs to be programmable – easily. The system needs to be flexible and dependable. I think you do understand this since you have set up websites and have set up a caching DNS. You mention you are disappointed that there is no mechanism for photographers to watermark and automate the insertion of a caption etc. This is really trivial to make. So for many of us, the holy grail is the OS and it’s basic utilities it comes with. For many of us the freedom to program the hardware we paid good money for is important to us(which is the basic principal of FOSS.). If you don’t care about the technical details, then I don’t care about users like you. If that is truly the case(the not caring about the politics behind FOSS), I would never lift a finger to write a single line of code for someone like you. You deserve to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for software.

I want to say one last thing to anyone talking about “Desktop” or “switching” or “experience”: go and buy a large box of donuts, sit in front of your TV, eat your donuts, get fat, and USE YOUR CELL PHONE. Computers are not for you. You need a device – pre-programmed with a pre-defined set of functions and limited capability. Welcome to the post-PC era.

For anyone to change, you have to prove beyond any doubt that what you offer is not only almost as good, or just a little better. It has to be FAR better. This goes for all areas in life. If you can prove that productivity goes dramatically up by switching to Ubuntu, you will win the world! Politics do not count in this. You have to prove that things will get finished sooner, and because of that will cost less. Like I said, the cost of the OS compared to the total cost of an editing system is nothing anybody looses sleep over.

Also, I don’t really bother to think about what BBC could save by switching their office systems to Ubuntu. I do not work for the BBC, I do not care about office systems (beside my own :-) ). The area where I can offer in-depth knowledge is the TV and film area. And you already got a bit of it higher up in this thread.

I do use FOSS. I have mentioned it here several times. And I love the applications I use. Not because it is FOSS, but because they are good! I really do not care if it is FOSS or not. The FOSS politics part is something I do not want to poke even with a 10 foot pole. I want to use the best app for the job. Period.

I do help out where I can, and I have also offered my help to some projects. One project told me pretty bluntly that they would never even consider requests from the pro people unless they paid up first. So much for the idealism. That do not sound to me like somebody that really want to improve their software…

If I knew how to program, I would start a video editing project myself. I have chosen to do other things in my life, so that is not part of what I can do. If anyone else would consider taking on a task like that, I’d be glad to help any way I can.

Laurence mentioned that the TV and film industry is already using Linux for special effects rendering. That is true, and they use it for other things too. Just not video editing.

BTW – I have a small contribution on my blog about setting up a caching DNS at home. Feel free to take a look at http://2tu.us/zcs and leave a comment there!

Actually the film industry does use Linux for their special effects rendering.

2) Most people just criticize FOSS (Free and Open Source Software), saying,”oh, anyway, I do not use FOSS, that’s not because of me, but just because there are no good enough professional FOSS solution”.

I would like them, video experts for instance, to help improve FOSS software that they would need.

For instance, I would be glad to know that Oceanwatcher, and everyone of us here, has spent at least one hour in his entire life to help FOSS. (Apart from you Vivek ;-) )
I mean helping OSS community and OSS software editors.

3) Regarding migration to Linux and big corporation, I would focus on the fact that 90% of BBC employees do not need top-level video editing software. So, most of the workstations could be linux-based, and, for those who need it, be able to run MS-Win-stuff, either with dual-boot or Virtualization.

Are you ever in Brazil, let me know :-) I am a Norwegian, but have moved to Brazil.

As for the apps – yes, I know Canonical makes the OS. But still – an OS without apps is worthless. It is the apps that bring users over, not the OS.

Re: Apple – I was talking about pro-level apps. The consumer stuff is not worth mentioning. I would love to see OSX on my home built PC, and before anyone says Rebel EFI – I want it legally with Apples blessing :-) But it would still be a multi boot. I earn my money using three OS’es :-)

BTW – Brazil has a fantastic BBQ as well….

It is not for Ubuntu or any other distro to “Make applications shine”, they provide the OS.

More and more developers and hardware manufacturers are coming to see the benefits of developing for this platform, as time moves on it will become unusual to find a Windows or Apple only application. Canonical are providing a great example of how you can make a good living providing free software. i.e. Through the excellent support companies are so willing to pay for mentioned above.

As for Apple providing good software?? I have disabled automatic updates of I Tunes as it is all about pain when they roll out untested software. Trying to revert, when they do not even use correct version numbering conventions is horrible. The last time I updated the software I did it because I Tunes would no longer allow me to buy music unless I did so. Needless to say I can now no longer edit the music on one of my Ipods as they messed up the driver. The suggested fix involved me creating a new XP user account, installing another version of I Tunes under that account and using it to flash the firmware. I have decided not to bother. :)

As for the free beer, anytime matey.

Don’t mistake me for a ranting geek who hates Windows, the majority of my machines are Microsoft but I earn my living with Unix.

Cheers