Is Ubuntu becoming the generic Linux distro?
Summary: Has anyone else noticed an increasing number of Linux newbies who seem to think that Ubuntu is Linux and Linux is Ubuntu?
Has anyone else noticed an increasing number of Linux newbies who seem to think that Ubuntu is Linux and Linux is Ubuntu?
Over the past year or so I've noticed an increasing number of newbies (a term which I use affectionately) interested in taking Linux for a spin - for example, the number or emails I'm getting on the subject from zero a year ago to several dozen a week. The reasons for their interest in Linux are many and varied, as is the level of commitment to making the switch from Windows or Mac. However, one thing stands out from all the conversations - the number of people who seem to confuse Ubuntu for Linux. I can tell because they will either use both terms interchangeably or be using the name Ubuntu in a generic sense. Moreover, it seems to be confined to Ubuntu. I've not seen the name of another distro used in the same way.
I have to admit that I like Ubuntu. Like it a lot. I've handled dozens of Linux distros over the past year to eighteen months and I always come back to Ubuntu. While I don't put myself into the Linux n00b category, I know that I'm not a million miles away from that camp so Ubuntu's friendliness and simplicity isn't lost on me. But another appeal of Ubuntu is the clear development cycle that the developers follow, along with the fact that each version I try turns out to be a significant improvement over the previous release. There's real momentum in the project. Whether the same level of development will happen once the basics have been nailed down remains to be seen, but for now, development seems to be moving on at a fair pace.
I'm of the opinion that the evolution of Ubuntu into the generic Linux distro isn't a bad thing. My opinion is that when it comes to a beginner entering the world of Linux, the staggering array of distros available is off-putting (I know that many disagree with me on this point and claim that choice is a good thing, but no one can show me evidence that new users embrace the huge number of distros with ease). A single distro offers those wanting to dabble in Linux a place to start and if Ubuntu is all; they need from Linux, great, otherwise there's a whole world of Linux distros to experiment and play with.
Ubuntu upcoming release, codenamed Hardy Heron, will be one of the easiest distros for newbies to try out thanks to the addition of the umenu loader and Wubi installer, both of which make installing Ubuntu alongside Windows easy. This will no doubt help make Ubuntu even more popular with Linux newbies.
Thoughts? Do you think that Ubuntu is becoming the generic Linux distro? Is this a good thing? Is Ubuntu the best distro for beginners? If not, what do you suggest?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
I agree + typo?
BTW: I believe you have a typo when you said say that you have handled dozens of Linux distros, and you say that you "always go back to Linux". Did you mean you always go back to Ubuntu?
I noticed that too and agree with the agreement.
Linux casually, I often refer to Ubuntu when I should be saying Kubuntu, which I primarily use. Of course there are those who
argue that "Linux" should be "GNU/Linux."
While RedHat did this by implication with the Fedora/RHEL split,
the Ubuntu people really did a nice job of explicitly parsing the
market into a group that requires stability and a group that
wants to take advantage of new and improved applications on
the Desktop and keeping the eye on the ball as to how to cater
to the rapid change crowd.
Linux is the escape from American communism
Sorry Penelope and Rupert, but you got a fight on your hands ...
Pfffttt... What silly little post.
Try here ...
yup
Here?s your hug.
Lots of ppl get this the wrong way around...
IF MS Windows XP was Open Sourced, it would have been a split by now, with lots of people continue developing MS Windows XP while Microsoft would continue (or not) with MS Vista. And one or two companies would have been formed around that. This is what GNU license is all about, giving the customers what they pay for, controll over the software, direct or indirectly.
But as it is closed source, customers can't do anything about that, except to continue pay for MS Windows Vista or switch to some other OS/distribution like Linux or OpenSolaris or whatever...
If RedHat or Suse would have done something like this, customers could fork or swich distribution.
Competition is good and "5 year plans", ? la Microsoft or former USSR, is bad for customers.
I can't understand MS supporters complaining about Open Source being "communism" and such. When in practice it is the other way around, Open Source is competition and good for customers and MicroSoft is not.
haha
Tip of the Day There's No capitalisim in a monopoly.
So.... Where exactly is your precious Capitalism? Microsoft was convicted of being a Monopoly and got broken up when? Yeah.
And how would you propose breaking up Microsoft
If Microsoft were to buy some Computer manufacturer (like Dell) and then only sell Windows on Dell machines they would be in direct compatition with Apple. Would that satisify you? Perhaps we ought to "Bust" Apple.
Even if you were to somehow "bust" Microsoft into multiple parts. One of those parts would be Windows. I'm curious to know how that would make the OS market any different.
Holy Smollies I just noticed your name!
And Microsoft Fanboy in bad way ;)
RE: haha
Thought this was a tech site. We can of course ignore the 8 trillion dollar added national debt the past three republican administrations have given us and aren't we sooo much better off with our current inflation etc., etc.
Capialism
Freedom to Innovate and all that.
However we now see the Government (that is Taxpayers) handing big Corporations Billions of Dollars to pail them out of the result of greed , corruption and stupidity of their leaders.
Who will pay for Mr. Madoff,with his $50 Billion fraud.
too rich
already too rich.
The big guys, the banksters, have ruined our country.
Intentional typo?
Or it could just be a typo. ;)
Intentional typo?
Typo.
More seriously, I too am in agreement that UBUNTU is a very good distro. I just ordered 7.10_64. I am expecting to install it on an AX2 5600/8GB computer. Problem: to my knowledge, very limited music software compared to the Windows platform. I totally hate to be in Redmond's pockets, but have no choice till the number of apps goes up substantially. People are relegated to experiment with Linux, but, unfortunately, the platform is still not rich enough as far as software is concerned. I know, I know, I am reiterating a well known problem, nevertheless the problem doesn't seem to want to go away. The big music software manufacturers have next to nothing when it comes to Linux and this is not only the music industry's problem but it's pervasive. Big commercial software carriers don't carry almost anything Linux (again, in comparison with the Windows platform), one needs to look for niche vendors. The problem is also that large corpotations continue to have huge contracts with Redmond, perpetuating the Windows platform. Don't get me wrong, I am not a partisan user. I LIKE Windows. But I simply am NOT going to dish out those $450 every 3 or so years and, more over, take on the reinstallation of the numerous applications I use on my 3 computers.
Sylva.
Try This
http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php?form_cat=122
Linux actually is very capable of multimedia. In fact Linux is usually the OS used to render animated movies because it works well in a cluster setup and can acheive results better than a super computer with just a bank of cheap Linux boxes. Personally, I use Amarok when on the desktop (it has some really cool plugins too).
PS: I think they should call it "*nix the OS formerly known as Ubuntu".
RE: simply am NOT going to dish out those $450 every 3 or so years
Your expert ...