back to Ubuntu 8.04

[Michael Hipp]

Lonni J Friedman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Michael Hipp <Michael at hipp.com> wrote:
>> Interesting stuff. Do you mind if I share it with some Ubuntu-ers that might
>> be interested? Is your install and stress test duplicatable (sp?) and would
>> you share it in sufficient detail to allow others to attempt to duplicate
>> your results? Otherwise, it's still just anecdotes rather than science and
>> doesn't count.
> 
> The stress test that I'm referring to (outside of installing the OS
> repeatedly) is for NVIDIA CUDA QA work, and is therefore not something
> that is publicly available.

Then it will remain your private assertion and unverifiable by any other party. 
Hmm.

> However, here are the relevant 8.10 kickstart & gcc bugs that I
> referenced which are both unfixed for 8.10 (both are seemingly fixed
> for 9.04 which does no one any good right now):
> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gccxml/+bug/293807
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/busybox/+bug/293586

Every distro and software product on the planet has outstanding bug reports. 
Big deal. And making fixes in the new upcoming version is, unfortunately, a 
very common practice in many if not most vendors. Means nothing.

>>> So contrary to popular opinion, I'm not just making this stuff up
>>> based on an irrational hatred of Ubuntu.
>> Ok, fair enough. But your *mannerism* regarding this subject makes you come
>> off exactly as such. About all you ever bring up is some grievance from 4
>> years ago about being ignored by some developers. That's the only "data" I
>> was aware of.
> 
> That was the beginning of the miserable experience attempting to work
> with Ubuntu.  Its just gotten worse from there.

More assertions. No data.

>>> yet Mark Shuttlesworth
>>> doesn't seem to care, because his well stated opinion is that their
>>> competition is Windows, and we all know how the quality is in that
>>> camp.
>> Can you attribute a quote somewhere to this effect? I'd be surprised if
>> that's really their position since quality is actually the thing that would
>> cause Windows users to switch IMHO.
> 
> See this past sunday's NY Times article on Ubuntu where Mark is quoted:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11ubuntu.html

There's nothing in that article that supports your accusation. Yes it says 
they're focusing on Windows. No mention of quality being unimportant. And that 
article, being a typical clueless piece of shallow journalism, is hardly 
authoritative. Methinks you're seeing what you want to see.

> Hopefully they will, but anyone who actually puts any stress of stress
> on the OS environment will see Ubuntu fall apart around them.

More assertions. I still want to see the results duplicated by some other 
party. That's a foundational principle of science.

Michael