Fix Ubuntu

by panarky • 13 years ago

581 299 13 years ago

panarky• 13 years ago

"In case you are either 1) a complete idiot; or 2) a lawyer; or 3) both, please be aware that this site is not affiliated with or approved by Canonical Limited."

"This site criticizes Canonical for certain privacy-invading features of Ubuntu and teaches users how to fix them. So, obviously, the site is not approved by Canonical."

"And our use of the trademarked term Ubuntu is plainly descriptive—it helps the public find this site and understand its message."

rlpb14• 13 years ago

"And our use of the trademarked term Ubuntu is plainly descriptive—it helps the public find this site and understand its message."

I disagree. askubuntu.com already exists and is officially sanctioned. From domain name alone, I think it's reasonable to assume that users will believe that fixubuntu.com is also officially sanctioned. Traffic generated by users being misled into going there is not legitimate in terms of the trademark.

OTOH, ubuntusucks.com is obviously critical commentary. I don't think that would (or should) be a trademark violation.

Piskvorrr4• 13 years ago

Nah. askubuntu has existed for many months as an independent site (both during the askubuntu.stackexchange.com beta and after moving to the .com domain at official launch); and the official sanction has been actively sought from both sides.

tsaoutourpants• 13 years ago

Why would Canonical put up a Web site about how to fix their own product, rather than just fix it?

This guys use of their mark clearly falls under the nominal use exception of fair use.

DannyBee2• 13 years ago

" Traffic generated by users being misled into going there is not legitimate in terms of the trademark."

FixUbuntu is a very very very very clear case of nominative fair use.

I can't think of a less close case in recent memory. They are using the trademark as it should be used - to describe the product they are talking about.

The fact that Ubuntu may not like what they are saying makes no difference. The disclaimer makes clear it's not associated, and they don't pretend, anywhere, that they are associated.

facorreia• 13 years ago

I fixed it by switching to Mint. I'm liking it so far.

glimmung• 13 years ago

I fixed it by switching to Xubuntu - very happy with the desktop. From my PoV it's the best of Ubuntu but without the gimmicks.

g8oz2• 13 years ago

Lubuntu is pretty good too.

aram• 13 years ago

Check out Mint XFCE; in my case it was the most suitable distro/flavor. Simply because of the lowest number of additional overrides and configuration I had to do to make it comfortable for use.

danielweber6• 13 years ago

It's so depressing that I need to keep on devoting mental energy to Linux environments. When I use Windows or OSX I don't have to keep on guessing on what-the-what is going on.

Then I go back to Linux for something and everything I used to know is now completely useless.

pantalaimon• 13 years ago

well, but it's free!

Nursie4• 13 years ago

Is it much mental energy to take a couple of minutes to just pick one?

I had to expend a lot more mental energy last time I tried to use modern Windows, and has OS X got a maximise button yet?

--edit-- I'm not trying to say "My OS is better than your OS" because we all know where that leads. I just don't think anything is perfect and it likely comes down to what you're used to.

gecko• 13 years ago

I'm pretty openly not a Linux desktop user, but come on: if Windows hasn't rearranged core functionality in the XP to Vista/7 transition, and again in the 7 to 8 transition, and again (less so, but noticeably) in the 8 to 8.1 transition, then I don't know what your standard is. (Apple's been better about it following the initial iOS-esque feature landings, but that, too, was disruptive.) Conversely, Ubuntu's operated roughly the same way since Unity initially landed, and if anything, has become more coherent. I can't speak to other distros, but I doubt it's been a radically different story there.

vidarh• 13 years ago

Surely this comment must be satire...

Piskvorrr4• 13 years ago

ahem Windows 8 ahem

profquail• 13 years ago

Have you considered giving FreeBSD a try? I do most of my work (development) on Windows, but the times when I did use Linux, I felt much the same way you do. Then, last summer, I decided to give FreeBSD a try; I loaded it up into a VirtualBox on one of my Windows machines and was amazed at how simple and clean it felt compared to Linux, and I've found the FreeBSD community (the forums, mailing lists, etc.) to be extremely helpful while learning my way around.

rlpb14• 13 years ago

Is there a fixmint.com? Apparently one is needed: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2013-...

levosmetalo2• 13 years ago

I don't understand what's the complaint here. I'm not familiar with Mint, but if Mint is using upstream versions of Linux kernel, Firefox and Xorg, I can see that only as a good thing, since I have more trust in upstream core developers of these packages then in Ubuntu or any other distributions "hardening". Just remember the Debian OpenSSH security fiasco where Debian "fixed" the security flaw in upstream OpenSSH and made all its users vulnerable.

csense• 13 years ago

I've been running Mint for over a year now and I'm pretty sure that xorg, kernel and firefox have had updates in that time.

On my current Linux Mint install (which is less than a year old and not heavily customized), my /etc/apt/sources.list.d has the following line:

    deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ raring-security main restricted universe multiverse

I'm not sure about the bootloader, but I'm pretty sure I've gotten kernel, X and Firefox updates between major releases.

I'm going to say this person's working with outdated or incorrect information, and/or security.ubuntu.com somehow got removed from his local installation.

themstheones• 13 years ago

I started using Ubuntu in 2005, and fell in love with it almost instantly. It was great for a long time before the slide began. It's sad that this site exists.

philliphaydon• 13 years ago

Sad that it exists or sad that it needs to exist?

andyl• 13 years ago

Just use Xubuntu!

bitwize• 13 years ago

http://www.debian.org

There, fixed.

Supermighty2• 13 years ago

I love Debian. But I wish they had a stable version released more often.

fredsted• 13 years ago

Why?

bluedino• 13 years ago

Unstable is pretty dang stable.

Datsundere• 13 years ago

When was the last time you used Debian?

I'm using arch (rolling distro) as my main OS. I do EVERYTHING on it.

octagonal2• 13 years ago

You could try getting on the testing release which (as far as I can tell) is still ten times as stable as Ubuntu while still getting frequent updates. Testing is the best of both worlds IMO (stability <-> freshness)

gagege• 13 years ago

http://www.linuxmint.com/download_lmde.php There, fixed :)

snarfy• 13 years ago

Ubuntu is basically debian unstable + ubuntu crap.

jbeja4• 13 years ago

I am just using Elementary Os.

h43z• 13 years ago

How do you like it so far? Any issues,bugs?

Brakenshire2• 13 years ago

It's very nicely polished up, and I find it to be much quicker than vanilla Ubuntu. There are still a couple of issues and inconsistencies here and there, and you have to be satisfied with designers making opinionated decisions. One thing which doesn't quite work as well as I'd like is the window switching behaviour- it's a bit of a hassle switching around when you have many windows open. But nevertheless I would say it's the best linux desktop I've used. I also like the developers asking for a small payment upfront, rather than trying to monetize your data behind the scenes.

jbeja4• 13 years ago

Been using for the past 4 months and i can say that is fast, easy, out of the way, no bugs so far, boots in a blink, and the design although is a rip off of OSX, is very pleasant to the eye.

On the "bad" side, several packages are outdated (since is base in Ubuntu 12.04) and not too many tools for customization. Is almost perfect. If just want something that just works and not to worry about in the future, use eOS.

Pxtl• 13 years ago

All Linux distros should be free charities and their developers should eat catfood and ramen.

g8oz2• 13 years ago

Or maybe they should have a strategy that doesn't violate user rights. Mindblowing I know.

Piskvorrr4• 13 years ago

Bzzt, logical fallacy - "either work for free, or snoop around in user's data for monetizable content." Hint: there's a very, very wide spectrum between these extremes.

nikatwork• 13 years ago

Bzzt, middlebrow dismissal. How about you make a concrete proposal on how you think Canonical's business model should be constructed, instead of "computer says no"?

jenius2• 13 years ago

While I see why people are unhappy with the sale of their data and ads, I have to agree with you on this. While obviously I don't enjoy having my information collected and sold without me really knowing by default, they do need to get money somehow.

I feel like we're in a weird transitional period where the "free internet" in which all major apps and services we used were VC funded and growing, completely free with no ads and nothing you have to pay for, and are suddenly starting to realize that they have to make money. So they start selling data, serving tons of ads, etc and then people get angry that their data is stolen, they are being showed ads, posts from people they don't follow are getting injected into their streams, etc.

There's nothing to be angry about here, it's just this now gigantic company putting in work on something you love and use all the time trying to get the funds to continue working on it.

I understand that a lot of people just won't pay for things no matter what, and you know what, that's fine - they can use the versions that are packed full of ads and sell your data. But what I would really love to see is when you use a service for them to give you an option between the two. You can either use this for free and we'll sell your data and show you ads, or you can pay us and we won't do any of the above. At least that way it's clear, and if you choose to use it for free then you are conscious that they are making money off you somehow.

I think the closest model I've seen to this honestly is in the app store - a lot of apps release 2 versions, a free and a paid version. The free version is somewhat limited and has ads all over the place, and the paid one has none of the aforementioned flaws.

We are just so accustomed to not paying for anything, and I feel like when reality comes crushing down that oh wait, now that the VC funds have dried up and the company needs to actually be profitable, the money has to come from somewhere.

tl;dr pay for the things you use, because they are worth it. and if not, stop using them.

lucaspiller• 13 years ago

what I would really love to see is when you use a service for them to give you an option between the two

It's an interesting theory, but with something like a Linux distribution I don't see it working too well. Of course you will have a small percentage of fans who will be happy to pay, but everyone else will just use the free version. Of those who want the paid features, they will just find command strings like this to toggle the ENABLE_PAID flag (remember Linux users are usually quite savvy). Unless the paid features are closed source...

Karunamon• 13 years ago

Somehow, every other publicly available Linux distro doesn't need to include spyware in order to do their job.

sandGorgon8• 13 years ago

No - I'm actually willing to pay for a good fast, stable linux with multimonitor support (that doesnt suck), has excellent suspend/hibernate/resume behavior and has very good compatibility with multimedia (TV HDMI, etc.)

I'm in India - and I cannot afford a Mac (and maybe dont want to). Build this system on top of SteamOS or Android or something (for hardware compatibility) and you will get my money.

rizalp2• 13 years ago

Exactly. I live in Indonesia, and the price of Apple product here is ridiculously expensive. I want Ubuntu to be the equivalent of OSX, but can support as many hardware configuration as possible

rizalp2• 13 years ago

It's funny how the history repeat itself when the company that support certain disro want to monetize it. A long time ago, it's Redhat. Then, SUSE with their licensing deal with Microsoft. Anyone knows what happens to Xandros and Mandriva?

I think Canonical should be more honest that they need money. People would gladly pay for stable OS that is supported long enough. I think the combination of Stable OS, lots of Apps that is close to the current upstream relase, and good hardware support is the winning formula here..

My dream is that I want Ubuntu to be essentially the equivalent of OSX, but I can install it on as many hardware configuration as possible, not just Mac

justincormack• 13 years ago

They are quite open, you can pay on the download screen http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/questions?distro=desk...

krelian2• 13 years ago

People would gladly pay for stable OS that is supported long enough.

Do you see the amounts of complaints they are getting from who paid $0? Imagine the outrage they will face when people who paid $10 start asking for their money back because they don't like feature X of the new release.

macspoofing• 13 years ago

It's kind of sad that this is the only way Ubuntu figured they can make money.

nicholassmith• 13 years ago

It's not, it's one of a number of ways they monetize their product.

Zigurd2• 13 years ago

No, it's sad that they don't take a holistic view of how they make money: They serve enterprise users and help create Ubuntu-based products for a fee, which business they would not have if Ubuntu was not the leading Linux distro, which it won't be if they screw up privacy issues.

Ubuntu has lost quite a bit of share to Mint. I have not been cranky enough about Unity to switch, but if I do find search data leaking despite the "privacy" settings that would about do it.

nfoz• 13 years ago

It is worth recognizing that our economic system fails to monetize the development of quality software.

Software Freedom is a highly regarded aspect of software (users want it, developers want to provide it), but we can't find a way to monetize its development without destroying the product. This has always been the problem, and it's worth recognizing it as such.

anoncow• 13 years ago

Does anyone have data on earnings from the pay what you want model that Ubuntu is using?

ISL• 13 years ago

Most distros make it really easy to donate. It's a worthwhile investment!

Zigurd2• 13 years ago

Canonical has monetization models that don't turn a Linux desktop experience into a billboard for Amazon. I use Amazon often and like it. I understand they mine the hell out of my interactions with Amazon, and that's fine.

But it is a mistake for Canonical to hook Amazon, which can be very intrusive, into practically every interaction with an Ubuntu desktop. It's jarring and objectionable to find a vendor who would aggressively data mine you wired in to an OS you used to be able to count on to be security-oriented and non-intrusive.

It isn't even right for Ubuntu Touch devices. When I use a Google-logo Android device, I make a knowing bargain, trading information for convenience and capabilities. The only thing Ubuntu does better than Android is to leave me alone.

MrZongle22• 13 years ago

Hey, have you tried some of the catfood that's available in stores these days? A couple of cans of Nature's Best, and not only are you ready to code for hours, but your coat will be shinier and you're less likely to develop a urinary tract infection.

vacri2• 13 years ago

Cat food (tinned meat, not kibbles) is more expensive than vegetables. If you're eating catfood to advertise your poverty, you're doing it out of a twisted sense of pride.

daniel-levin• 13 years ago

I use XMonad, and don't have these problems to fix (in a sense, because XMonad 'fixes' them). For those who are on Linux who've never used XMonad, I suggest you give it a try. It's awesome. I'm on Ubuntu 13.04 and have never been bothered by ads. Also, I find the instantaneous desktop switching and fullscreen windows, resizable tiling invaluable.

levosmetalo2• 13 years ago

For people that love Emacs and Lisp, I would suggest to also take a look at StumpWM. It's implemented in Common Lisp, and you can customize and develop extension on the fly.

platz• 13 years ago

I installed i3 on my ubuntu laptop and am so used tiling windows now, especially since i3 lets you choose which way new windows will be tiled.

tych0• 13 years ago

Adding another one to the list, I am the maintainer of Qtile, a tiling WM written and configured in python. We've even got an ubuntu ppa, so we're only an apt-get install away :-). http://qtile.org

harel• 13 years ago

As a Gnome user all this Unity madness just went over my head - I never had to deal with it. But there are things that keep breaking from one release to the other (for which I blame myself for having twitchy update-trigger fingers). But as a whole I'm a happy user in particular that now Steam is on Linux. My question is - how does Steam work on the Ubuntu derivatives like Xubuntu and Mint? Will it work on Debian?

splawn• 13 years ago

Steam works fine on both Xubuntu and Mint. Haven't tried it on Debian yet

Derpdiherp• 13 years ago

I use Steam on Debian stable and it works absolutely fine, I've never had an issue with it. The games run great too.

nhenezi• 13 years ago

Steam is in Jessie repository: http://packages.debian.org/jessie/steam

puppetmaster32• 13 years ago

Arch makes it easy: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Based_Distribution... Majaro has Steam built in.

NateDad2• 13 years ago

If people did 30 seconds of searching they'd realize this information is available on the official Stack Exchange site AskUbuntu.com which is directly supported by Canonical's paid staff:

http://askubuntu.com/questions/192269/how-can-i-remove-amazo...

sbarre3• 13 years ago

True but this site also acts as criticism to the approach in the first place, and also guarantees that this information will remain available and findable in the future, should Canonical change its mind about making this information easy to find.

NateDad2• 13 years ago

I'm just trying to point out that the people who say Canonical is trying to silence the guy are just talking out their ass. They are freely providing this information in the number one place people go to ask questions about Ubuntu. All they did was say (incredibly nicely and politely) "Hey, umm... so, that's our copyrighted name and logo, and you know, you're really supposed to ask permission before using them".

vacri2• 13 years ago

The way to do things changes with every single Ubuntu release. A colleague once looked up some way to alter a desktop setting (can't recall which) and he found that it was different in each of the past four ubuntu releases (as of 13.04).

Similarly, you have to know you want to remove each of the items - fixubuntu hits a bunch at once. It doesn't require as much a priori knowledge.

cs702• 13 years ago

Ubuntu provides by default an on/off slider in its privacy settings for disabling the display of online search results in the dash[1], BUT I'm not sure if changing that slider to 'off' will also disable the sharing of searches with Canonical's servers. (The language used by the settings app is ambiguous: "When searching on the dash, include online search results - ON/OFF.")

Moreover, I don't particularly feel like spending time & effort examining Unity Dash source code to figure out if and how my information might be shared with Canonical and/or other third parties. Canonical should make an unambiguous promise not to transmit any data to anyone, right there on the privacy settings screen, whenever that slider is set to the 'off' position. I would trust such an unambiguous promise.

So thank you for submitting this website here -- I've bookmarked it for when I upgrade my desktops from 12.04 LTS to 14.04 LTS next year.

[1] http://b2b.cbsimg.net/blogs/screenshot-from-2013-03-24-09342...

Edit: Added second paragraph.

mdeslaur5• 13 years ago

Yes, it's supposed to disable it completely.

sillysaurus2• 13 years ago

supposed to

What's with the ambiguity? Does it disable it or not?

I feel silly for asking, but the question was about ambiguous language, so the reply was ironic.

rlpb14• 13 years ago

It's open source. Since it sounds like you won't trust Canonical's claim on this anyway, why don't you take a look, or ask somebody who can, instead of creating fear about it?

If it turns out that searches leak out despite the setting, I'm sure you'll hit the front page of HN. Since this hasn't happened, and Canonical have been under considerable scrutiny about it, I think it's safe to say that your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up.

mdeslaur5• 13 years ago

If the searches leak out despite the settings, I would like to know about it so I can promptly issue a security update.

zanny• 13 years ago

Why not just use a non-Unity desktop? At this point all 3 major spins of Ubuntu are highly stable and functional.

D9u• 13 years ago

The other versions within the Ubuntu family also connect to Canonical servers.

I see connections to "...golem.canonical.com" in Etherape when using Lubuntu 13.10.

nivla3• 13 years ago

This reminds me of "whoopsie" when I first came across it after upgrading my servers to 12.04. Its a program that resides in the ram, automatically homes in the crash reports and would have to be explicitly disabled. At first I din't mind, but after watching it eat through my ram I had it disabled. As far as privacy goes, who knows what those sent in memory dumps might have.

rlpb14• 13 years ago

whoopsie doesn't send anything without your permission.

keithpeter4• 13 years ago

"I've bookmarked it for when I upgrade my desktops from 12.04 LTS to 14.04 LTS next year"

Shuttleworth changes his strategy more often than his underpants but I recollect that there was a 'business edition' of 12.04 that cut out all the Web 2.0 integration stuff. Might be worth checking if a similar edition was made for 14.04.

This is all I can find now, no ISOs for 12.04 any more

http://www.ubuntu.com/content/introducing-ubuntu-business-de...

nisa4• 13 years ago

My personal fix Ubuntu:

Be careful, this is pretty rude and may break stuff - it is also not complete but some dependencies are too entangled. Only geoclue and indicator-datetime still annoy me. The idea to poll the internet regulary to check for the timezone of the machine is beyond me.

   apt-get purge ubuntuone* # I don't use it
   apt-get purge unity-lens-music unity-lens-video unity-lens-photos # I don't need the integration
   apt-get purge friends* # I don't use this either
   apt-get purge telepathy-logger telepathy-indicator telepathy-salut # pidgin is enough for me
   apt-get purge unity-scope-musicstores unity-scope-openclipart # No need for that in Unity
   apt-get purge oneconf # I don't want to sync my settings
   apt-get purge empathy # pidgin works fine 
   apt-get purge software-center* # synaptic is enough 
   apt-get purge evolution-data-server evolution-data-server-goa evolution-calendar-factory # thunderbird and lightning for me
   apt-get purge unity-scopes-runner unity-webapps-common xul-ext-unity xul-ext-websites-integration # my browser is enough - no integration for me

   apt-get --purge autoremove
   apt-get install pidgin synaptic

Shrinks RSS from 622MB to ~400MB on my system.

csmuk2• 13 years ago

My personal one:

   # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=4M

Then I go and find another distribution that doesn't treat its users like cattle. Ubuntu, after shuttleworth being an asshat to the community and the whole amazon and NIH Mir and upstart crap, is now the Ryanair of Linux distributions.

incidentally, don't type the above.

tzury• 13 years ago

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    !!! ALERT !!!

    Do not type or paste the above, unless you wish to 
    destroy your partition!

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

sandGorgon8• 13 years ago

here's mine - http://www.lambdacurry.com/super-fast-lean-ubuntu-setup/

It removes Unity and switches to gnome-shell, removes nautilus and other stuff and replaces it with nemo, geany, etc.

I do have some additional tweaks to improve wifi, etc. but the base install brings my RSS with firefox (I consider that a minimum) to about 500 mb on 12.04

nisa4• 13 years ago

I'm actually quite happy with Ubuntu and Unity. There are some annoying bugs and I've switched to KDE recently but Unity is overall fine in my opinion. I'd always take Unity over Gnome. But well let's not start this discussion. To each his own.. I just don't like all the Canonical addons I don't use. So I remove them.

Regarding swap compression:

I'm happy with zcache¹. zramswap is out of date and buggy for me (I'm not exactly sure here). There is also zswap². I'm running Linux 3.11

To enable zcache edit /etc/default/grub and add zcache to GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT

To enable zswap add zswap.enable=1

Both can't be running at the same time.

1: http://lwn.net/Articles/397574/

2: http://lwn.net/Articles/528817/

rodolphoarruda2• 13 years ago

What's wrong with Nautilus? I'm just curious.

rthomas6• 13 years ago

Why even use Ubuntu at this point? Why not Debian? Or even something totally different?

japhyr• 13 years ago

I'm an emacs person myself, but when I teach Python I have students install Geany. I love it for working with beginners.

I'm curious, what do you use Geany for?

J_Darnley3• 13 years ago

Are you aware that your page there just seems to spew the raw HTML source to a page it looks like it should be embedding from Github?

yownie2• 13 years ago

This is great! It's nice to know there's others out there ripping out unknown unity shit too! Do you have any idea what the following do and if they can be removed easily also ? goa-daemon, zeitgeist, mission-control, bamfdaemon

nisa4• 13 years ago

bamfdaemon is quite important I think. It is responsible to coordinate windows and unity icons with .desktop files.

zeitgeist takes care of your used documents and applications?. I tried to get rid of it but the dependencies here are quite entangled and it's useful to have often used applications and documents at hand in Unity.

goa is GNOME online accounts. The dubious idea to connect your online account with your desktop. Some like it. Not sure how to get rid of it.

mission-control is probably part of the telepathy framework. The idea behind telepathy is probably pretty nice. However there is no OTR for telepathy and I'm happy using pidgin. It's probably safe to remove along the rest of telepathy if you don't need it.

It's a shame that modern desktop Linux has no decent manpages for most of this stuff. If you want to learn something about your system install apt-file and use apt-cache or Google to learn about all the stuff that is running.

sandGorgon8• 13 years ago

I have found that most of the complaints about Gnome-Shell being bloated comes from installing it on top of a desktop running Unity - which has a whole bunch of stuff running in the background.

Removing Unity and installing Gnome (which is far more configurable because of http://extensions.gnome.org) has turned out to be really lean for me.

davexunit• 13 years ago

Just use Debian.

philjackson• 13 years ago

    apt-get purge friends

nisa4• 13 years ago

It's used for social media accounts. I don't really use social media and and I don't use the dash in a way that I expect social media. I still have friends through ;)

ewzimm• 13 years ago

If you are using 12.04, you can easily switch to a completely free Trisquel 6, which is based on 12.04 and compatible with PPAs and other software designed for Ubuntu.

http://trisquel.info/en/wiki/migrate-ubuntu-trisquel-without...

berrypicker• 13 years ago

I'm not whining here, I'm a long-time Ubuntu user and want it to do well and become more popular, but if the 'year of the Linux desktop' is ever to happen, there are greater fixes that Ubuntu needs (Ubuntu is pretty much the only distro that, at this time, has a chance of becoming mainstream i.e. reach at least 5% usage share).

For starters, it needs to work out of the box with the average user in mind. I don't think I've ever had a smooth install that didn't require searching the Ubuntu forums to get basic stuff running. If Ubuntu wants to compete with Windows, it can't ship an operating system that can't wake from a suspend on most laptops and requires using a terminal (which most people don't even know what it's for) to perform basic tasks and configuration. The experience for a novice computer user, however terrible you think Microsoft is, has always been excellent on Windows in that it suits their needs of requiring only little knowledge of how software works.

Piskvorrr4• 13 years ago

Interesting; I mostly agree, except for the "no smooth installs" - from my data points, where I was struggling with Windows drivers, Ubuntu had been mostly plug-and-play (since about 10.04 onward). Then again, my userbase is mostly using office PCs and laptops, without too specialized peripherals.

l337n1nj45• 13 years ago

Agreed. Most of the time, I have no problem getting my laptop upgraded to the newest version, and all of my drivers are already there; no need to search online for any of them.

However, I also have the problem with small, minor things either only partially working or being completely broken (e.g. when I updated to 13.04, it started hiding applications on me, but it 'fixed' itself some time ago).

I think it would be a double-edged sword if the 'year of the Linux desktop' did occur. On one hand, more people would be using a great set of OS's and we would probably get more updates and flashier new features. However, with more people understanding the Linux kernel and how it operates, more 'black hats' and 'script kiddies' would have the tools to damage Linux systems, create Linux-based viruses, etc. In my opinion? I'm OK with where Linux is right now.

jebblue3• 13 years ago

> becoming mainstream i.e. reach at least 5% usage share

Prove that it hasn't. When I bought this machine I booted Windows 8 because I'd read that I had to do some stuff to fix it so I could install Ubuntu, it didn't work so I booted an Ubuntu LiveCD and wiped the disks then installed Ubuntu. The point being that somewhere Microsoft now may count this machine as a bought license even though I don't run Windows 8 on it. There are probably many machines out there like mine.

psykovsky• 13 years ago

I have at least 4 machines at my house in the exact same situation. They all have windows license stickers and they were activated, but they all run Ubuntu, not windows.

Mikeb853• 13 years ago

This whining about Ubuntu is ridiculous. Removing the shopping features is easy enough anyway, without devoting a site to it, never mind posting it to HN.

Furthermore, there's plenty of choices out there. The best of which (IMO) are openSUSE, Fedora, and Arch/Manjaro. Mint is terrible - like a buggier version of Ubuntu or unstable Debian...

Furthermore, Canonical puts alot of work into Ubuntu. They deserve to get paid. Maybe consider actually using Amazon through their app as a way of contributing?

tonylemesmer• 13 years ago

is it possible to pay them and get an "ad free" version?

fearandclothing• 13 years ago

There's an option to donate when you download the .iso, so I suppose you could just do that and then uninstall the Amazon stuff.

taeric2• 13 years ago

Since it is basically possible to get an "ad free" version by disabling that feature, and it is possible to donate to them. Yes?

Fuzzwah• 13 years ago

Am I allowed to agree that Canonical deserve to get paid, but firmly believe that doing it via the methods which the submitted link removes isn't the right way?

Personally I've used http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/questions to contribute.

keithpeter4• 13 years ago

"Maybe consider actually using Amazon through their app as a way of contributing?"

Affiliate site for when I am searching for products to buy, yes no problem, and link Rhythmbox in as well so Amazon can suggest music.

Pointless, intrusive and potentially embarrassing (slow Internet) automatic searching of Amazon for random desktop searches, no thanks.

codygman5• 13 years ago

For a typical user figuring out the command that this site provides to ensure their privacy is most certainly not "easy enough".

Mikeb853• 13 years ago

Luckily enough for them, turning off the Amazon search lens can be done through a GUI, and not just shell commands...

applecore• 13 years ago

If you're looking for a simpler OS, you should try Xubuntu:

http://xubuntu.org/

bsg75• 13 years ago

Does Xubuntu have any of the privacy concerns / "features" built in that Ubuntu does?

xendo• 13 years ago

Nope, all the "features" are built into desktop environment (unity) rather than ubuntu itself.

epsylon2• 13 years ago

If you're already an Ubuntu user, you can just sudo apt-get install xfce and sudo apt-get remove unity*.

bowlofpetunias• 13 years ago

You misspelled "Fix Unity".

Yes, of course average desktop users don't get the difference between OS and desktop manager, but a) wasn't that one of the issues we were supposed to solve with Linux on the desktop?, and b) those users are never, ever going to follow those instruction.

I'm all in favor of spreading awareness, encouraging people to turn this crap off and putting pressure on Canonical to at the very least make this explicit opt-in.

But this is just jerking off in the dark.

rlpb14• 13 years ago

I (still) don't think online searches are a privacy violation.

1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine (unless you count things that do by design, such as web browsers and email, obviously).

2) It's plainly obvious the first time you use it that results are coming back from the Internet. No real user is going to be misled into believing that searches are local. This makes it no more a privacy violation than the default Google search box in Firefox.

2b) There is a prominent notice saying so. If you don't think it's prominent enough, see point 2.

3) It's a search box that didn't exist previously. Canonical invented it. I think it's reasonable for Canonical to create a "search the universe" mechanism on the desktop. Fair enough if you don't like it, or don't want to use it. It's trivial to turn it off (there's even a global Privacy Settings dialog) or to use other searches. But that doesn't suddenly make it a privacy violation; nor the results of your search "ads".

Edit: I should have expected the downvotes. I notice, though, that the downvoters are unable to actually respond to my argument.

alcari• 13 years ago

It's a search box that many people will use exclusively to search for _local_ content.

Why should Amazon know what programs and files I'm using?

rlpb14• 13 years ago

It's a search box that many people will use exclusively to search for _local_ content.

That still doesn't make it a privacy violation, since you know where your searches are going (as does any other user, since it's obvious based on the results).

Why should Amazon know what programs and files I'm using?

It makes the normal user's life more convenient since he doesn't need to figure out which box to type something in. You think that's ridiculous? Users are well known for typing web addresses into any box available. They cannot tell the difference. Having a single box for everything makes for a better experience,.

Amazon doesn't know what programs and files you're using, since Canonical anonymizes it. If you don't like it, or you don't trust Canonical, and you still want to use the "search everything" search box, then adjust the settings to do what you want.

mdeslaur5• 13 years ago

It's a search box that many people will use exclusively to search for _local_ content.

You're using the wrong search box if you want to search exclusively for local content. Try hitting Super-A, Super-F or clicking on the applications or files tabs to search locally.

stolio3• 13 years ago

I'll respond, though I'm sure the reason nobody's responded is they're as tired of this conversation as I am.

1) Yet. When boiling frogs it's best to turn the heat up slowly. Canonical isn't providing a service for free here, they make money mining your searches and sending them to 3rd parties like Amazon. Compare this with its parent distribution's Social Contract. [0] Especially the phrase "We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities." Note the lack of a profit motive as compared to Canonical's continuous search for monetization schemes.

2) Real users may not realize they have a choice, or that sending searches to 3rd parties is NOT normal in the GNU/Linux world. Ubuntu has intentionally made itself a "My First Linux" distro so many of its users are new to the idea of software freedom and are in need of guidance.

2b) EULA's are no excuse. Did you know that using Adobe Flash prevents you from working on GNU Gnash? It was in the EULA you agreed to. [1] Everything's confusing during your first *nix experience, the average person probably has a mental list of a dozen things that don't make sense, that's a questionable time to get people to sign off on privacy compromises.

3) Blurring the lines between local and global is interesting. Blurring the lines between Open Source and spyware is not. [2]

[0] http://www.debian.org/social_contract [1] - http://www.gnashdev.org/?q=node/25#eula [2] - http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do

rlpb14• 13 years ago

I said that there is no privacy violation. None of your arguments demonstrate otherwise.

1) [profit motive]

The Mozilla Foundation's main source of income is making money through Google searches. If you accept Mozilla in the GNU/Linux world, then you accept this motive on your own terms.

2) Real users may not realize they have a choice, or that sending searches to 3rd parties is NOT normal in the GNU/Linux world.

This is a philosophical argument about foisting your own beliefs onto new Ubuntu users. Ubuntu has always been the pragmatic distribution. It gained popularity by making non-free codecs and proprietary drivers easily available. This pragmatism has not changed.

And this still doesn't have anything to do with a claimed privacy violation.

2b) EULA's are no excuse.

Which is why I had my point 2: that it is plainly obvious that the search is a global search, and that the query was sent out to the Internet. You don't need to read any notice to see this.

[spyware]

You have not shown that there is any spyware present. That would require some kind of privacy violation.

takluyver• 13 years ago

I don't like that the default is to search online as well as locally. But calling it spyware is hyperbole - the interface makes it quite obvious that it's doing a combined online+local search. I'd rather stick to more factual criticisms.

iwasanewt• 13 years ago

2b) which part of the Adobe Flash EULA prevents you from working on GNU Gnash?

krelian2• 13 years ago

Canonical isn't providing a service for free here

Canonical is providing the operating system for free.

CodeMage• 13 years ago

1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine (unless you count things that do by design, such as web browsers and email, obviously).

The Unity Dash search box is placed where every user would normally expect a local-only search to happen. There is no reason whatsoever for me to expect the Unity Dash search to return results from the Internet, just like I wouldn't expect the search box in Windows 7 Start Menu to do so.

This kind of behavior that plays with users' expectations is common in UI dark patterns.

Your example with Firefox is misleading, because Firefox is a browser, which automatically creates different expectation of privacy: it is quite normal for a search box in a Web browser to search the Web.

Also, note that you're essentially saying that there is no privacy violation past the first time it happens. This is more or less the equivalent of saying that once you've fallen for an advance fee fraud the first time, it's not a scam anymore.

2b) There is a prominent notice saying so. If you don't think it's prominent enough, see point 2.

I disagree that it's prominent enough. So do many other users and you know it, otherwise you wouldn't have bothered to write that second sentence.

None of the dark patterns or privacy violations seen elsewhere existed before they were invented. The fact that they didn't exist before has nothing to do with the intentions behind them or the effects they have. It might be new, you might like it and it might be trivial to turn off, but none of that makes it any less of a privacy violation.

In short, you're using misleading and circular arguments: there's no privacy violation because Canonical changed the behavior of the search box and you should learn to expect it. No wonder you state that the downvoters are "unable" to respond.

yeukhon• 13 years ago

To your search box point, the search box is to move Ubuntu to the mobile and to the online market just like Android, Apple and even FxOS have a search box directly to either Google search or app search (FxOS does app search of course).

The point is they try to move away from "browser search" to "Oh I need something quickly and I just need to press ctrl/command-F search this". If they do have a button to disable the feature (and assuming they do this properly) there is no violation of privacy. Of course I am sure I would be much happier to opt-out during installation process. That's a topic you have to raise to ubuntu dev. With enough people say fu they will introduce this opt-out.

commandar• 13 years ago

There is no reason whatsoever for me to expect the Unity Dash search to return results from the Internet, just like I wouldn't expect the search box in Windows 7 Start Menu to do so.

This is the default behavior in W8.1, however.

nl• 13 years ago

I think you are wrong about this.

The distinction between local & remote search isn't something that is apparent to many users. Additionally, it isn't at all clear that there should be a distinction.

Your example with Firefox is misleading, because Firefox is a browser, which automatically creates different expectation of privacy: it is quite normal for a search box in a Web browser to search the Web.

Many users don't understand the distinction between "applications" and "data" at all, let alone the difference between applications. They just want to find something!

josephlord• 13 years ago

Does it ask users explicitly before sending desktop search results out from the computer? If not it is privacy invading, it should be opt in. A prominent notice or being obvious it is happening isn't enough especially if there aren't equally prominent options to turn it off.

Clear positive opt in - Good

Opt out (even if fairly easy) - clear privacy violation (bad)

The snide comment in your edit earned you a downvote from me.

riquito2• 13 years ago

1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine

Is this even an argument? If the box isn't used (crippling the user interface) there is nothing to discuss. You may also argue that if the pc is powered off there aren't privacy problems.

2) It's plainly obvious the first time you use it that results are coming back from the Internet.

So discovering that you lost your privacy after the fact is the correct way to be informed?

2b) There is a prominent notice saying so. If you don't think it's prominent enough, see point 2.

I think it's not prominent enough, see the answer to the point 2

3) It's a search box that didn't exist previously. Canonical invented it. I think it's reasonable for Canonical to create a "search the universe" mechanism on the desktop. Fair enough if you don't like it, or don't want to use it. It's trivial to turn it off (there's even a global Privacy Settings dialog) or to use other searches

Let's break it down

It's a search box that didn't exist previously. Canonical invented it.

How can this give rights over the users' privacy is beyond me

I think it's reasonable for Canonical to create a "search the universe" mechanism on the desktop.

Sure, as long the users know beforehand that they are "searching the universe"

It's trivial to turn it off

Would you like a bath that by default stream what you do over internet? But ehi, "it's trivial to turn it off", so what's the problem? It should be _obviously_ an opt-in

Edit: I should have expected the downvotes. I notice, though, that the downvoters are unable to actually respond to my argument.

The downvoters are able to respond. Are you unable to read?

jfoster• 13 years ago

Do you have a problem with Google search? Google search as the default page in Mozilla Firefox? The omnibox in Chrome? Search is just a bit more deeply integrated with Ubuntu. The vast majority of users will find it more convenient than they will find it to be an "invasion of privacy". The ones concerned about it will turn it off or boycott Ubuntu.

_cipher_• 13 years ago

1) It's a search box. Stuff not typed in the search box never leaves the machine (unless you count things that do by design, such as web browsers and email, obviously).

Imagine the scenario where you >search< in a >box< (term) with `grep -inr "pattern" /random/path` and you get results like:

  ./random/path/file pattern
  ./random/path/file2 pattern
  hxxp://www.amazon.com/product-with-pattern-name

Nice, right? You performed a search. Why not go public? Hell, why not go over plain text?

Take it even further. Visit amazon or c@n0nical's site and be welcomed with your hostname. Great, eh? And while you're at it, send all patterns to NSA as well, because, ummm, it's a "search box".

Do you still think that this is not a privacy violation?

C@n0nical has become a pimp.

Seems that many people erased POSIX and privacy from their dictionary.

dllthomas• 13 years ago

1) Install ratpoison...

drill_sarge3• 13 years ago

People use default Ubuntu with Unity? From what I see, most people use a variant (X/L/K) of it and those are really well put together without (most) of the Canonical crap.

octagonal2• 13 years ago

The people you know don't use stock Ubuntu. My mom and yours don't even know what a package manager is.

drill_sarge3• 13 years ago

My parents use Xubuntu because it's the closest you can get to WindowsXP ;)

username42• 13 years ago

I like very much ubuntu-gnome. They need some help http://ubuntugnome.org/

drill_sarge3• 13 years ago

I tried it with, I think, 13.04 and you could see they need people testing it. For a raw Gnome distro Fedora is the better choice.

spindritf• 13 years ago

People use default Ubuntu with Unity?

Of course, I don't even change the background. "Canical crap" is mostly mythical or takes a single toggle to turn off.

camedee• 13 years ago

s/fix ubuntu/fork ubuntu/g

wojt_eu• 13 years ago

Why you shouldn't paste code from websites directly into terminal: http://thejh.net/misc/website-terminal-copy-paste

shortstuffsushi2• 13 years ago

Did you read the part explaining what each of the commands does...?

ktf2• 13 years ago

Did you read the linked article? It doesn't matter what it looks like you're copying/pasting, or how it's explained in the site you're copying/pasting it from.

sbarre3• 13 years ago

I really like the disclaimer in the bottom right. Except for the "idiot" part at the beginning which I feel cheapens the message, it is very well written in clear language.

Houshalter• 13 years ago

The use of idiot is necessary as no sane person will learn anything from reading that that they didn't already know.

sbarre3• 13 years ago

Spoken like someone who lives in a tech bubble and has no concept of tact.

Are you a developer by chance?

Sami_Lehtinen• 13 years ago

Choose Debian, Mint or Xubuntu.

mergy• 13 years ago

Better option >> http://www.crunchbang.org

jiggy2011• 13 years ago

I'm surprised there isn't an offshoot distro that is exactly identical except has all of these features disabled by default.

zx2c47• 13 years ago

Solution: stop using Ubuntu.

There are lots of other very able distributions out there, many of which not only have better privacy features but also are technologically superior in one way or another.

In no particular order, these are all very capable operating systems for a variety of needs:

* https://fedoraproject.org/

* http://www.centos.org/

* http://www.opensuse.org/

* http://www.mageia.org/

* https://www.archlinux.org/

* http://www.gentoo.org/

* http://www.sabayon.org/

* http://www.debian.org/

* http://www.linuxmint.com/

This list is non exhaustive. They are all free. They all work well in different places. There are others too.

We've all had ample indication that Ubuntu was headed for the pits. It's time to move on.

  -- a proud gentoo dev

adamnemecek• 13 years ago

Yeah, I switched to Debian a while back and it was surprisingly frictionless.

klrr• 13 years ago

Linux Mint? Isn't that essentially the same thing as Ubuntu or am I missing something? That is, is it the lens search that is the problem or are there other privacy concerns about Ubuntu?

zx2c47• 13 years ago

I think they've got an edition based on Debian.

l337n1nj45• 13 years ago

Mint is based off of Ubuntu, but also has a version based off of Debian, as zx2c4 has pointed out. The biggest difference is that Mint uses the Cinnamon desktop environment, as opposed to Unity, which was forked from Gnome 2. Also, they use Nemo, which was forked from Nautilus, which has more functionality and features as opposed to Nautilus.

null_ptr• 13 years ago

It's only the Unity lens, that's why you see people here recommending Ubuntu derivatives like Kubuntu and Xubuntu.

pnathan• 13 years ago

Yep! I've moved to using Debian for production machines and gentoo for personal/development machines. I've been quite happy with the move.

SuSE has a big focus on the enterprise level - I didn't realize that until earlier this year when I talked with a SuSE dev. So enterprises have options other than Ubuntu for standardized & supported Linux.

zx2c47• 13 years ago

Not to mention the venerable RHEL.

List of Enterprise Linuxes:

* http://www.redhat.com/products/enterprise-linux/

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux

* https://www.suse.com/solutions/platform.html

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSE_Linux_Enterprise_Server

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSE_Linux_Enterprise_Desktop

* http://www.centos.org/

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS

* https://www.scientificlinux.org/

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Linux

And so forth...

rlpb14• 13 years ago

Or use Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Kubuntu or Ubuntu GNOME. None of these use Unity as their default desktop, whose default behavior is really what this complaint is about.

donpdonp• 13 years ago

If Unity is the problem, Ubuntu has the Gnome Shell already in its repo. Its quick and easy.

$ sudo apt-get install gnome-shell

You keep the benefits of the Ubuntu package repo, kernel patches, etc.

nowarninglabel• 13 years ago

Yeah, it's quite sad to me, I thought I would never move on from Ubuntu, it was really great until Unity and all this other crap they started piling on it. And now with the corporate fear-mongering over their trademark, that's the last straw for me, I'm going to try moving upstream to Debian and recommend companies I work to do the same.

MrZongle22• 13 years ago

Same here; I was a huge fanboy of Ubuntu for years, but Canonical seems hellbent on introducing change for change's sake. At first, it was mildly annoying but easily corrected: the nonsensical decision to move window maximize/minimize/close buttons from right to left is an example. But Unity was a bitter (and buggy) pill to swallow.

I've moved on to Linux Mint and Crunchbang. Can't say I miss Ubuntu at this point. If they decide to pull their heads out and pay more attention to the wider community, I may eventually use a distro again. I wish them well, but I don't feel that their priorities intersect with my interests.

cdash• 13 years ago

No thanks, I am fine.

levesque• 13 years ago

The problem with other distros is the lack of a design. Ubuntu was the first Linux distro I used that did not look like a donkey's ass (back in 2008~). Even today's Gnome Shell does not look as good as Unity... it also does not scale well for my display's 1600x900 resolution (top bar icons are way too small).

The other distros might work well technically, but imho they don't look as good and they require more tweaking, which is a hassle for me.

0X1A• 13 years ago

That is completely subjective. A lot of people hate Unity, the same way people hate every DE that exists. So much so that some do not even use a DE. Using a DE as an argument for Ubuntu's advantage is weak as they're usually ambiguous. I say usually because it tends to be that Unity, like Mir, isn't really adopted into any other distribution in official repositories. Even more so after Mir's release, since it'll be dependent on it.

laumars5• 13 years ago

The problem with other distros is the lack of a design.

Not true - plenty of distros ship pretty default themes (ArchBang, Mint, ElementoryOS, etc). And themes are just that - a theme. They can easily be installed on any distro - even ones that look "ugly" out of the box.

Ubuntu was the first Linux distro I used that did not look like a donkey's ass (back in 2008~).

They key bit there is "I used" - ie there's been plenty but you're unaware of them. Ubuntu wasn't the first to place emphasis on aesthetics (I remember being wowed by Mandrake back in 2002) and it's certainly not the only distro to care about that at the moment. Ubuntu is just the distro that shouts the loudest because Shuttleworth has deep pockets.

Even today's Gnome Shell does not look as good as Unity.

Subjective. Personally I think Unity is the ugliest of the heavyweight desktop environments. And Unity is certainly the least attractive part of Ubuntu (the colours, icons and font rendering is what makes Ubuntu look good, in my opinion)

neverminder• 13 years ago

I don't like Canonical's privacy trips, but I do prefer Unity because of it's most refined interface and modern look in comparison to others. Looks clean and consistent on any display. I have dual 1920x1200s.

johnsea5• 13 years ago

But Ubuntu looks good (imo) and is comparatively easy. Hope many Apple/Windows users switch to it. Big step in the right direction. Apps 'uncomplicated' software and I think it is very necessary that there is a mainstream Linux distribution which focusses on 'uncomplicated' computing.

'Privacy' be damned. At least as long as one can configure settings as easy as is the case here. (Privacy quoted as I cannot see the problem here, compared to e.g. google or facebook which are able to build up a whole profile of you (and me)).

(would love to try out gentoo once, but time...)

zx2c47• 13 years ago

Plenty of other distros are easy and look good too. Gentoo isn't one of them, but a few others on that list are pretty okay...

synchronise• 13 years ago

Problem is that none of those distributions, except for the bloated mess that is Linux Mint, has adequate support for PPA's. Hence, I'm sticking with Lubuntu.

zx2c47• 13 years ago

Most of those distributions have mechanisms comparable to PPAs for similar functionality.

dysoco• 13 years ago

I used to be an elitist and dump sh*t in Ubuntu, but lately I've been running it on my Desktop.

I mean, it works, it's pretty, it's used... plus there's something in Unity which I like, it just gets out of the way (most of the time).

Of those distros you've posted there, I'd consider OpenSUSE, Mageia and Debian. OpenSUSE and Mageia are KDE-Centric and I'm not a big fan of it, and Debian is OK although had problems with it in the past.

I'd stay with Funtoo if I could, but honestly I don't have the time anymore.

tete• 13 years ago

Okay, this will make me sound like fanboyism (I guess it is, but I am an Arch user - with our company running their servers on FreeBSD), but you might also like:

* http://www.slackware.com/

* http://www.freebsd.org/

* http://www.netbsd.org/

* http://www.openbsd.org/

* http://www.dragonflybsd.org/

All of them are used in production, search engines (at least FreeBSD (Google backends and DuckDuckGo) and DragonFly BSD), space crafts (at least NetBSD (ISS)), internet service providers (all of them), resarch agencies (all of them), US government/military (well, I am not sure about DragonFly BSD in this case).

kclay• 13 years ago

Been using lubuntu on my laptop ever since I got it

jccc• 13 years ago

Regarding that "disclaimer" in the corner, here's why it was added:

https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canonical-shouldnt-abuse-trade...

balls187• 13 years ago

US Trademark law is kind of sticky. If you don't actively defend your trademark, you can lose it.

orionblastar2• 13 years ago

But isn't there a 'fair use' clause? At least there used to be one at one time before we lost our liberties, rights, and freedoms with the DMCA and Patriot Act.

pacofvf• 13 years ago

if you are worried because what you type at the dash is being sent to third parties for advertising then you should stop using google to search anything (yeah including maps), this is the last reason I wouldn't use Unity, I actually don't use it, but I don't use it because of the friggin vertical toolbar and the sluggish performance.

MarcusBrutus• 13 years ago

I get:

    No such schema 'com.canonical.Unity.Lenses'

when running the script, and a few lines below:

   E: Unable to locate package unity-lens-shopping

ktf2• 13 years ago

Alternative method: click the big on/off switch for online search results.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not defending Ubuntu. I think it's gross that they include this at all, and extra-gross that it's on by default. But let's not get too carried away with the hyperbole and conspiracy theories.

Just read the source! Or if you don't trust the source, just examine your network traffic. Pretty easy to verify whether the button does what it claims...

EDIT/PSA: Don't copy/paste things from a website directly into your terminal. See http://thejh.net/misc/website-terminal-copy-paste, for example.

davidgerard• 13 years ago

" I wanted to update/install my nvidia drivers, so I opened the dash and typed "drivers". IT DISPLAYED GOLF CLUBS on sale at Amazon!"

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/bikeshed/vtXkVdALoJ8/N...

Of course, 14.04 will increase the usability level by automatically charging your credit card, with next day delivery of the golf clubs guaranteed.

badman_ting• 13 years ago

Ha, check out the petty retorts to the sentiment as well. One guy even stoops to nitpicking the other's (perfectly cromulent) grammar. And of course the requisite brandishing of the dreaded "FUD".

This whole thing is pathetic, why defend it? Why is it so hard to admit that your precious free software has problems?

surge• 13 years ago

I just installed 13.10 today, perfect!

adrianmalacoda• 13 years ago

Proud user of Trisquel[1] since 2010. It's a fork of Ubuntu that adheres to GNU's Guidelines for Free System Distributions[2].

While I'm aware that the general opinion of the free software movement ranges from "extreme" to "considered harmful," it is a nice feeling knowing that the creators of the distro have some ethical guidelines in place to prevent things like this - as it turns out, the free software types also tend to be some of the louder privacy advocate types as well.

Mint is probably a better option unless you know your system does not require proprietary drivers, as GNU/FSF kosher distros use a version of the kernel that lacks those proprietary drivers.

[1] http://trisquel.info/

[2] https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guideli...

lcedp• 13 years ago

I just don't use Unity

lacion• 13 years ago

frankly is canonical is getting money from me typing "gedit" or virtualbox a couple of times them thats ok for me, its not like their scanning every document on your pc and sending information around.

on a side not i would like to know how much people complaining about ubuntu practices still google services.

OHMYGODUSETHIS• 13 years ago

Use Arch. Problem solved. Yes, it takes a bit more work, but you get a much better understanding of your system and learn how to block or eliminate things (like this ad-serving search crap) you don't like.

keithpeter4• 13 years ago

Or: CentOS with EPEL and Nux repos for slightly older but solid packages,and just get work done...

Conservative VS leading edge I suppose.

davidrudder• 13 years ago

Pasting code from a website, even with explanations, worries me far more than someone recording my Internet search history.

vladtaltos• 13 years ago

this should give a nice boost to fixubuntu.com page hits. nice work canonical - I knew you secretly wanted people to disable the default security problems... cheers...

notatoad• 13 years ago

why yes, let's encourage people to copy and paste random code snippets from the internet into their terminal.

schmichael• 13 years ago

If only this also replaced Mir with Wayland, upstart with systemd, and Unity with Gnome.

alexanderchr• 13 years ago

Wow, this made the search a _lot_ faster. Thanks!

Zardoz84• 13 years ago

Fine but I simply use KUbuntu.

ChrisNorstrom• 13 years ago

He should have added the code to install a compiz plugin to move that damn Unity Bar from the left to the bottom of the screen like 90% of normal human beings have wanted it since the beginning.

Let's just be honest, Mark Shuttleworth has Steve Jobs envy, as many creative types do. They want to be the "creative arrogant leader that everyone has to listen to".

j7• 13 years ago

This becomes more relevant every day: http://magnatecha.com/moving-from-ubuntu-to-debian/

ansible• 13 years ago

Ahhh... Unity.

Shortly after upgrading, I needed to burn a CD. So I go to fire up Gnome's Brasero. I start typing it in, and before I've finished, Unity helpfully provides me with advertisements of bras for women. At work. Yeah, that's helpful.

orionblastar2• 13 years ago

Canonical is using people and organizations who use Ubuntu: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canoni...

I had recently made Blastarix: http://blastar.in/linux/

I am now scared that I'll get sued, just because I modified Ubuntu, renamed it to Blastarix, and removed the Amazon search and ads feature with some other tweaks. I do not know how to remove the Ubuntu logo and startup screens and I used uck to make the distro. I also added the 32 bit Steam for Linux client so gamers had it pre-installed and most developers play games on Steam anyway.

puppetmaster32• 13 years ago

fyi, Arch has the best wiki. that is all.

mariuolo• 13 years ago

I see a Streisand Effect in the making here.

Fix Ubuntu

Related Stories