back to Ubuntu 8.04

[Lonni J Friedman]

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Michael Hipp <Michael at hipp.com> wrote:
> 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.

The fact remains that only ubuntu falls apart under these
circumstances while the others do not.


>> 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.

Quite the contrary, it means alot.  I never claimed that Ubuntu was
somehow unique based on the fact that it had bugs.  What I stated is
that quality is unimportant to Ubuntu as their bar is set against
Microsoft products.


>>>> 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.

Pot -> Kettle -> Black.  You asked for more information, I provided
it.  Now you've changed your story and don't want to hear any of it.

Just don't start taking a high & mighty tone with me about the
'foundations of science' while you disparage that which you don't want
to hear.  You deserve Ubuntu if this is the attitude that you choose
to have.


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
L. Friedman                                    netllama at gmail.com
LlamaLand                       https://netllama.linux-sxs.org