i am confused about the point of using Ubuntu.

What do i use it for? I love it, and i love the feel of the latest 9.10. i love how i had mine customized, and looking way more attractive than my windows 7, but then after i get done hacking and have it working (fun part), i am stuck.

What do i do with it? Why would i use it?

I cant find any quality games, or programs. nothing equivalent or even close to being as high quality as many of the windows programs I use. Such as photoshop. People say gimp, but no. gimp is nothing like photoshop. If gimp is anything, its like paint.net, or maybe corel paintshop pro, but nothing close to photoshop.

I find myself having to leave ubuntu all the time when i actually wanna do something, such as edit images, or play a decent game.

Ubuntu does have some cool games, but they remind me of years 2003 and earlier on windows.

There are some things that ubuntu does better than my windows, but those are minor, and arent worth using ubuntu full time for.


Im really sad, because i love ubuntu and the feel of it i have, but there just arent enough quality products to use on it.
Icouldnt even find a decent paid graphic editor. i dunno.

mostly what i did on ubuntu was chat via IM.

I am bored of windows, but i fear windows is what im stuck with until people get serious about linux, and want it to be attractive and useful.

I was thinking about moving to OS X, but i'd probably have the same problems with it. There are more quality programs for OSX than linux, but not as many as windows, and clearly not enough games. but this topic is really about ubuntu/linux.

Whaat do i really do with it? Whats the point really? what should i use it for?
Im lost and stuck.

Maybe i am missing something. I really want to use something besides windows, like i said, but maybe there is nothing else?

I am hoping that im missing something. i dunno. lemme know.

thanks

http://www.getdeb.net/


- usually has some good new stuff- though I would check the repositories to see if the program is there but also they have some that are not found in the repository-

I now have Windows 7 but also have xubuntu installed in Virtual Box with the LXDE desktop.

I could not stay away from the linux world for long.

I use Ubuntu if I feel my privacy is at risk. I have to say you hit the nail on the head because I feel exactly the way you do about Ubuntu.

There's only one thing you can do and that's make Windows 7 look like Ubuntu.

Gnome has this Macintosh style feel to it and i just love it but in real world usage you're pretty much stuck and that seems to happen every time a new version is released.

It's sad really.

Maybe you should make your own OS since your ****ed about all the other OS's.

Here, let me get you a glass of Wine. Just need to CrossOver the footpath.

The point? To me the point of Ubuntu is a low-cost (nothing is free, time is an asset), lightweight OS (by comparison to the market leader) that will allow a generic user to perform their generic tasks with ease.

I have put my mum, my wife and a few others on Ubuntu. They had low-spec machines, they wanted nothing more than to browse, email, facebook, word process, spreadsheet, chat. It works just fine for them, and not once have I had to deal with trojans, malware or other ****ups related to running the more attacked OS.

The point is that it's free. But as you may realize, you get what you pay for, although Ubuntu isn't that bad for something completely free.

I would say that it is probably not for you, I'm always in the same problem like you, I install it but after some time I just give up as I find no uses for it.

So ubuntu (or other linux) is not for you, and I suppose it depends on the user, if you are a basic user that needs email, browsing, chatting and media, ubuntu is fine.

If you can't find a purpose for it, you don't need it.

I understand the original posters position. I use Ubuntu on two of my servers but for a personal machine I have a lot of Software that I can't run on it. Games mostly but Photoshop is important to me as well. Wine is good but it's not that good.

For me: Win 7 for my Desktop, Mac OS X for my Notebook and Ubuntu for my Servers.

You should give "GIMP Shop" a try it's a plugin for GIMP that sets it up just like PhotoShop.

I found a ton of games in linux in Linux Mint, including but not limited to; Nexuiz, Alien Arena, Battle for Wesnoth, Frozen Bubble, GNOME Games (solitaire, blackjack, chess, tetris, etc.), Many Emulators; and if that weren't enough there's WINE, PlayOnLinux, Syntensity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Linux_games http://www.google.com/cse?cx=0026834153311...1&sa=Search

You do with linux what you want, after all that's the spirit of linux freedom. Why did you install linux in the first place if you had no practical use for it? (Because It Looked Cool?) that's hardly reason enough to change an operating system. I encourage you to explore more of the linux world and you'll surely discover more treats.

why use ubuntu?
because some people arn't software pirates and have more than one computer, but dont use the other ones enough for the need to spend another $150+.

I just set up my netbook as a media center using Xubuntu + XBMC, xubuntu is supposed to be a lighter version of ubuntu.

If you find your not using it because it doesn't suit your needs, thats ok your not a traitor or something, some people just need different OS's for different reasons. I personally Don't Need windows for anything, I work on my websites, browse the web, do banking some light word processing and play guild wars on my Kubuntu it suits me fine for my needs. However I can understand that their are people who need more than what Linux can currently offer.

I think the point Ubuntu is hoping to eventually make is that Linux can be usable on the desktop by anyone, it's just going to take time before it happens. As of right now it's starting to work good, but it does suffer in the area that many big name developers aren't developing for it, that's not really the fault of Ubuntu/Linux it's just the way things are at the moment.



I would say the op installed it because he/she wanted to learn something new. But then grew bored with it, that's not necessarily a bad thing it just happens sometimes. At least thats my guess by reading their post.

.... In your post you listed your needs, games and quality programs. Yea Windows has the games but quality programs is subjective.
I think you got Ubuntu for the wrong reasons.

Here are a few that I found:

1) Ubuntu is Free and so is any other Linux distro. (Save + ~ $200)
2) You don’t have to buy MS Office separately. It comes with OpenOffice preinstalled. (Save + ~ $200)
3) You don’t have to buy costly hardware for the basic needs. (RAM. Processor, HDD etc.)
4) Ubuntu is very stable.
5) You are free from Viruses so you don’t have to buy another upgrade of Norton, NOD32 or any other Antivirus software. (Save + ~ $75)
6) When you have installed Ubuntu, you don’t have to install anything else to get you started with your productivity.
7) You don’t have to wait for years for the bugs to get fixed. You can track them down in Ubuntu.
8) You can update everything on your system with just one update manager.
9) Don’t get tired restarting your computer all the time. You do it almost never with Ubuntu.
10) You are free from Pirated software. With Ubuntu you can share it with as many people as you want and it is LEGAL.
11) You don’t have to bother searching the web for new software. Ubuntu gets a whole lot of software free of cost to you.
12) Play hundreds of games for Free.
13) Your PC won’t get slower day by day. It happens in Windows only.
14) Use MSN, AIM, ICQ, Jabber, Gtalk, Yahoo and many more with a single program. No need to install separate software for the same thing.
15) Tired of managing multiple windows on your screen. You can use workspaces to manage your work.
16) You old computer will get a second life. Because Ubuntu does not need those high resources as Windows.
17) Jump into the next generation of desktop themes with Compiz using a lot less resources than Windows.
18) With Ubuntu, it is free. Ubuntu is free and will stay that way.
19) All future upgrades of Ubuntu are provided free of cost. New releases are put out every 6 months.
20) Upgrades are installed automatically. You don’t have to bother about losing your data and redoing lots of personalization. Updates are installed with your permission and only if you want them…not in
the background without you knowing it.
21) You can tweak your desktop wallpaper or any other setting the way you want it. You can make it look like Windows or Mac (If you want.).
22) You don’t have to defrag your hard disk to boost performance. Ubuntu does it for you automatically.
23) You don’t have to go to a shop to buy operating system of choice. You can download it anytime you want it and burn it on a CD or DVD.
24) Thousands of users are there to help you with when you are stuck. Become a part of the Ubuntu Forums.
25) You will get free and Long Term Support (LTS) for selected Ubuntu Realeses.

There are many more, I am sure!

The one thing that everyone should not lose site of is that whatever you decide to use in the end, it must be the product that gives you what YOU need, to get the job done, whatever that may be!

Or maybe you are actually sad about something else, and taking it out on poor Ubuntu.

Wow.

So basically you're saying that you don't see the point of using Ubuntu, ask other people what the point is, then you name your two main problems with it (Photoshop and Games). If those are your only problems, you have it easy man.

First of all, I use Photoshop under Ubuntu for some part time jobs, and it works fine for me. Of course you can't expect it to be 100% stable, but it works. So you have one problem solved.

The other thing, games. You can always check Wine's Application Database to check if the particular game is supported or not under Wine. Or you can check if there's a native Linux version. Or you can try out hundreds of free games from your repos, from PlayDeb or from the web. Personally, I don't play much. I have World of Goo (native Linux version), and some emulators. Good enough for me.

As for everything else, the web, music, movies, office, you have decent replacements, or versions for Linux, or some apps that might even suit you better. You just need to search a little bit, use it a little bit longer, until the real you realize the good side of it, instead of complaining how Ubuntu isn't this magical OS that completely changed your life, gave you inner happiness, made your penis bigger and what not.

That's about it. Will not change anytime real soon now. If you only want to surf and listen to music, can't/won't find a free w7 version, ubuntu does the job.


It's an insurmountable barrier, the vast number of Windows based apps build up over the decades is impossible to convert to linux.

Like the OP, I find myself going back to Windows after countless efforts at making Linux my full time OS. Perhaps it's Windows Live Messenger that I need to play games with my friends or the seamless compatibility with MS Office files (something OOo still needs to work more on) or it's just the game that I play does not work under Wine. Linux is evolving and I'm hoping one day, it can fully replace my daily computing needs. For now, the answer is Windows.

I tried to use ubuntu on an old laptop, it was fine, nothing special. Did what I needed it to do. But I always found my way back to XP on it. There was always some piece of software which was Windows only...

FWIW this what I do on Ubuntu (or Linux, for that matter) most part of the time:

-The obvious: browse the web, IM, email, listen music, watch movies and series.
-Bash scripting.
-Some image editing with Gimp and vectorial drawing (pretty much just for documentation, so Gimp and Inkscape fit the job nicely).
-Writing docs and spreadsheets with both openoffice and msoffice.
-Project management.
-Running virtual machines for testing purposes or to set up demos for clients.
-Programming Windows monitors, utils and scripts, using a virtual machine.
-Running courses and presentations.
-Some casual gaming (last time was several months already, when I gave Wesnoth a try).
-Some web developing.
-Encode movies, and some light movie edition.

I surely could do most of this stuff on Windows as well, but I find it's window management to be utterly awkward, and ssh-ing to other machines is a PITA. We always work with a mix of Windows and Unix servers, so using something uncomfortable would be just plain stupid (RDP works great on Linux anyway).
There are also other details, like connection sharing being a whole lot easier and faster to set up on Linux, which comes handy when travelling with my laptop.

If you don't know what to do with Linux then either:
-You have yet to get used to it.
-It's not for you.

Ubuntu is just another linux distribution that people tries to work with just because its free. Maybe they are happy, maybe they are right. But i never use linux's XMMS, OpenOffice, KDE, GNOME, XFCE, GIMP or other silly designed and unstable applications. Go with Windows (any release of windows including windows 2000 is better than any linux distro, IMO) and hq windows software...

That at least 50% of the reasoning behind using anything, isn't it? It LOOKS cool and every one is doing it? Kind of like how a lot of people say the interface in Opera or Seamonkey stinks, so no one uses it. Was just a whole thread on that exact topic not long ago here.

I'm using Xubuntu via the wubi installer (inside Windows) and that's the ONLY reason I installed it. The simple ease of it, although I've used many Linux distros in the past. I'm not a Ubuntu fanboy and actually prefer Blag or Zenwalk over it, but I just like playing with different OS's. I DO mainly use Linux and can do everything I need to do with it.

Sorry Farstrider, you really shouldn't have posted that list. It was probably well intentioned but it's done you no favours. Many of the points are flat out wrong or highly debatable, and sure others are indeed true. The result is an argument here about your list and not really answering the OP question. In my book that doesn't help!

As has been pointed out you can indeed run Photoshop on most versions of Linux via Wine/Crossover or similar. The OP should try this. Sure, it's never going to be as good as running Photoshop on Windows or Mac as it was intended for. The suggestion to try Gimp Shop is also a wise one. Can anybody else suggest other Photoshop alternatives for the OP to try?

As for games, again it's wise to check compatibility via Wine/Crossover for the particular games you wish to play. Otherwise, stick to Windows it's far better supported games wise.

Thus, if those are the OPs requirements then he probably should stick to Windows as it's better suited for him. Either that or run a dual-boot machine so he can switch between the two. As pointed out Ubuntu handles many day-to-day tasks just fine.

Why should you use Ubuntu or Linux in general? Only if it suits you. If not, there are really only a couple other choices, Windows and OSX. Of these three, which one has the best ability to be modified into something that suits the way you use a computer? Linux can be changed the most. But if something in Windows or OSX is exactly what you want, why not use those?

As for me, I love the package management in Linux. It cannot be beat! I love knowing I can browse the web, and not have to worry about compromised adverts on reputable sites being used to deliver malware. I love being able to freely install without licensing or restrictions on any of my home PCs (like what the kids use, see also malware resistance) if they get their OS buggered up. For me, using and administering Linux has been more effortless than I have ever had in Windows.


Once again, the "free/gratis" is confused with "free/libre".

While the gratis is nice, it is the libre that allows me to install where I like, with the features I like without restrictions. The "you get what you pay for" statement is a fallacy. You want really good Windows software, pay me $1000. Then you will really be getting a good piece of software, because you pay more. Right?

I use it because it's a cheap alternative to Windows. I have an old machine that can't run the latest games and I can't afford $300+ upgrades, so Ubuntu works fine for me. I can read e-mail, browse around, listen to music, watch movies and even play WoW on it. That's pretty much all I need a PC for at the moment, so there's no reason to spend a ton of money on Windows.

Seriously, if you can't find a use for an OS like Linux, you are doing it wrong.

- You can do graphical work with GIMP and other image editors (been doing it for years), those work just a good as commercial solutions. The fact that those don't look like what you are used to is a matter of lack of use. Spend some time exploring GIMP and you'll find that it is really a very powerful solution on par with Adobe Photoshop.

- You can play games on Linux (again, been doing it for years now). You have native commercial games like Quake, Doom, UT. And others that work just as well as in Windows (some even better), using WINE. And no, not all free Linux games look like they are from 2003 and earlier.

- You have thousands of free, costless applications, all listed and ordered by category at your disposal ready to be installed, all of those spyware/malware/adware/virus-free.

- You have advanced Window managers, and great things like virtual desktops all designed to ease the use of your desktop and even increase your productivity.

- You are not restricted to one desktop, one window manager, one file explorer, (...) if you don't like something in one you just go with another. You have alternatives.

- No-one forces you to install software that you do not want or do not need. It's all modular, you choose what you want or do not want to have installed on your computer.

- Your computer and all that is inside it belongs to you. You do not have to sign sketchy licenses that take away all of your freedom and property.

- You can have peace of mind, knowing that you're free from most of the problems the big World Wide Web has to offer, as your platform isn't the target of spammers, virus writers, and all of those bad intentioned folks.

- Security holes don't take ages to be patched. You don't need to wait for Patch Tuesday and pray that Exploit Wednesday won't take down your system.

- You don't have a mangled OS.

- You don't need to use "hacks" to perform simple tasks like a customization of your desktop.

- As it's all open source, you are ensured that nothing in it will violate your rights and privacy.

(...)



Might I suggest you start learning the basics?
Command line, simple scripting. If you plan on finding a job in the IT area, knowing these things will really help you there.

Ubuntu's repos are a good idea in theory. In practice, I've been fighting them since Hardy. There are some big problems I have with them, namely 1) inability to easily separate what updates I do and don't want. I want updates for Firefox for Transmission. I do NOT want to waste bandwidth downloading updates for Ubuntu One, F-Spot and a whole host of other programs I never use. 2) I don't get to save the downloaded installers somewhere onto my USB. 3) Ubuntu employs a stepped-upgrade model, which irritates the **** out of me. 4) Incompatibilities with .deb packages. Install software from a .deb package instead of from a repo, and that software doesn't necessarily receive updates. 5) Doesn't work with "portable" software, only installed packages. If you're running, say, Minefield off a USB key or separate partition (which I am right now), this "central system-wide package update manager" falls flat on its face.

I'm not particularly sure why 4) happens, as it does so sporadically. The most memorable occurence I have with it is with Virtualbox, which ended up running its own updater instead of plugging itself with the Update Manager. Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, the Update Manager is a good idea only on paper. In practice, software on my Windows partition keep themselves more up-to-date by far since their update mechanisms don't absolutely p*ss me off and do their best to get in my way all the time. That, and I don't have to do a dist-upgrade and reboot just to get a newer version of OpenOffice.

Besides, how much code does it get to take a program to ping its servers once every few hours/days/weeks/etc or so and report that a new version is available? More code than it takes for every single package to report themselves to the Update Manager and integrate themselves into the central mechanism and receive/apply updates this way? Is there some special API on Linux for this that automagically does everything, because I find it doubtful.


Point to me where I said that ext4 is a "fragmentation nightmare". Oh wait, you can't, because I didn't.

The simple fact that a defrag utility exists (and was created by ext4 devs themselves, no less) means that there's a need for one. That's all I was saying.



Okay, I didn't know about that. I stand corrected.

Still, it's far easier to get live support for Windows from real live people. I could ask my friends, my co-workers, the guys in the computer labs in the next building. Linux? Short of Google and online forums, I'm basically on my own.

You dont really have to worry too much about viruses on Windows Vista/7, with UAC and IE8 and MSE... you're pretty guarded.. Kinda sick of people talking about how Windows is so prone to Viruses.. yeah PC's were Vulnerable in the XP Era.....

Linux is written differently (Obviously :3) to Windows, so you've got security I guess. Plus the fact that you're not paying in order to use it.

But, I'm *assuming* you've already got a Windows license, so that last one doesn't matter if this is the case.

If your priorities are games and running Photoshop as a specific app then Ubuntu (or Linux in general) is not for you.

Other people with other interests may find Ubuntu to be the bomb. Some people are even willing to learn how to use Gimp.

Personally, Ubuntu proved to be the most user friendly distro I could think of. I was (still am) seriously sick of Windows, just generally bored and put iff and decided to switch -- and I couldn't be happier. It's working smoother and hassle free, even more than I had expected it to be.

Why are Linux/Mac people with such opinion nearly non-existent?!

Just to set an example, the only version of Photoshop (CS2) that works in Wine would be considered outdated, CS3 and CS4 get a rating of garbage, the 3 newest versions of Paint Shop Pro also get a rating of garbage. Wine is not a bad start, but it is far from an effective or certain tool yet when it comes to crossing over.

As for Linux, my main use for it is to manipulate the Linux partitions that I have on my phone's SD card (setup for the Apps to SD hack)

Seems to me like a non-OS related question. I can sit in front of a computer and ask, what am I supposed to do with it. Computer is not the outcome, it is means to achieve the outcome. OS being the flavor.

If you generally use your computer for gaming and image editing, dare I say, Linux should not be your primary choice.

But a large number of people use it for things like development and/or browsing. Some even venture into gaming and image editing, those people find Linux sufficient enough for those tasks.

As it has been said, you should use the OS best suited for your needs.

Packages don't report themselves to the update manager. At most, what some packages might do is adding a repository if it's not already available (just writing a line to sources.list in the case of Ubuntu) so you get updates through the manager (if you manually installed the deb package, that is).

Deb packages installed manually don't get updates unless the repo is added in the post-install script included inside the package, and that happens because obviously the update manager cannot foretell where it should be able to fetch updates for that package (updates that might not even exist as for all it knows you could have built the deb yourself). Hence why it doesn't even try, and manually installing deb packages doesn't involve apt but just dpkg.

As for 2), you have the downloaded packages in /var/cache/apt/archives.
You can also tell synaptic to generate a download script (bash or bat) that will fetch the selected packages along with any required dependency, in case you didn't have internet connection on that box.

With 3) I agree. I much prefer rolling distros like Arch and Gentoo, but I guess periodic releases can be useful for some

1) can be done: open synaptic, select the package, go to the "package" menu and check "lock version".


Anyway, as much as I like apt, Gentoo's portage still makes more sense to me: pre/post-install scripts are inside the ebuild file, so you don't actually have to package anything in any special way. It doesn't matter if you distribute your software as zip, tar, bin, sh or whatever... anything will work. You can even install stuff from physical media through the package manager.

So remove the programs that you do not use, no more waste of bandwidth.

atlef.

Too much work. Propose an easier solution.

Check the "lock version" I mentioned above.

Why bother with linux on desktop when windows is cheap?

Believe it or not, some of us actually prefer Linux.

Someone like me, for instance.

Linux is not for everyone. If you need to use Windows software, use Windows. If you are software agnostic, and your needs are simple and few, then Linux is the OS for you. It really depends on what you use your computer for.

You apparently haven't used Ubuntu enough to get the basic hang of how it's set up. The downloaded updates are saved to /var/cache/apt/archives and can be saved/moved to whereever one desires. The update manager lets you select which updates you want to install and then proceed, it's a matter of mere clicks -- you're making it sound like it's forcing updates you don't want down your throat. If you install anything from a .deb you also need to add that source to the update manager otherwise it wouldn't know where to fetch the updates from. There's also a nice GUI frontend available for the .deb installer which not only installs it in a single click, but also scans the .deb file and tells me whether or not all dependencies are resolved.

If Virtualbox ran it's own updater, I don't see how that's Ubuntu's fault when Sun essentially didn't bother integrating their updater with Ubuntu's? It works on windows the same way, doesn't it?

Also, I think that's the general idea with "portable" apps. A portable app should be just that, PORTABLE -- without the end user worrying about "updating" it because if you feel compelled to update something that's not installed, then you're doing it wrong. Most windows based portable apps are the same way, aren't they? Your argument about the dist-upgrade is equally flawed as that command, by design, fetches all updates available to that specific distro of Ubuntu. It also asks your confirmation before even starting to download and install the updates. Why would you even want to use dist-upgrade when you could just tick the Openoffice updates in the update manager and proceed is beyond any reasoning.

The update manager can be configured (again, by merely choosing between the suitable options in the dropbox [daily, weekly etc]) to change the time interval between it checks for updates available for the installed apps. I don't know why you seem to enjoy inflating non-issues like these? It's only making your incoherence rather obvious.

All in all, your only (ONLY) valid point in the entire post you made was that you can probably get better and live support for Windows from your friends and colleagues.

I love Ubuntu. Its awesome! I was bored with Windows...

However, probably off topic but I have always felt uneasy about backup. I know I can use TAR and several other tools to backup my install and restore, but!.. What about the other disks I have that are all NTFS (from Windows days) in the machine.

These disks are full of data so formatting is not an option.
- What are the best options to back these up to external disks?
- Is there any risk of corruption etc?

I know its a time and knowledge thing, but since using ubuntu I have never looked back. To be honest I don't want to go back. I would rather work out these few teething issues because once worked out things will be smooth sailing.

Yeah, sorry about the question asking possibly in the wrong thread.

My point to using Ubuntu - Its fun, It gives me the freedom to do what I want and most of all its secure.

Your "counterpoints" on the package management show a clear non-comprehension on how it works. Installing apps. Using .deb files. And how it doesn't "ping" or any sort of scattered version checks. These all escape you, yet you are sure you know it is worse.

And, I can no longer point to your post talking about fragmentation, and using both the terms "nightmare" and "voodoo", because it has been deleted by a moderator. Probably rule-violating, huh?

Thanks. Are those just incremental upgrade packages that only works if an app is already installed, or can I reinstall a whole app from scratch back to its latest version by running them?


Yes, it lets me select which updates I want by hunting through the 40-50 packages it presents, with no obvious way of filtering out only the ones I want.


You know what? I agree. Nonetheless it was apparently the way things were done when OOo 3.1 was first released. I thought OOo and Ubuntu were open-source friends. Why was it that I needed a dist-upgrade while in Windows all I had to do was download and run the installer executable is beyond any reasoning indeed.


Doesn't really help anything. I don't mind it notifying me when there are updates. What I don't like is how it works, i.e. creating two software install methods (repos vs packages) that don't always work properly with each other. I'm glad to hear they're non-issues for you. Really. But again, the fact that you can live with these irritations is quite useless and irrelevant to me.


If I'm willing to spend time hunting through Synaptic for them one by one, I probably could just go with atlef's solution as well. =/


It's not really that hard to figure out. What sounds like a seamless, one-touch central updating mechanism actually comes with a whole bunch of limitations and annoyances in practice. It doesn't work the way I want it to; ergo, it is worse (for me).


I see. How convenient for you. If only getting away with putting words into other people's mouths was always this easy...

You can install the whole thing from the stuff in /var/apt/cache (or wherever, I'd have to go looking for the correct directory)


If you see something that you don't want then remove it. If you see something that you might want but you don't want to continually download updates then lock it in place. If all of that is too much bother then just let it upgrade. Most packages are fairly small anyway.

Some programs run on multiple Linux systems and not every Linux system has a package management system as sophisticated as Ubuntu or Debian (who both use apt-get). Some programs have their own Distro-neutral upgrade system to account for these other Linuxes. Personally, I prefer to stick to apt-get since my distro has it.

.deb packages are downloaded from repositories. I don't see how there are "two software install methods" and I don't know what you are getting at.

Again, if it is too much bother then just let them upgrade. Most packages are fairly small.

Well, if it doesn't work for you then it doesn't work for you. To me it seems like you are just annoyed that your distro comes with too much stuff and you are too lazy to pare it down to what you really need. Perhaps a more minimal distribution would be better for you. Ubuntu is considered to be not too bad in this regard. At least it doesn't come with 24 different text editors pre-installed.

When you want to go advanced in Linux, it's much easier to learn the command line and use that. Not only can you hold packages, you can install packages as --no-upgrade. See more here...

http://linux.die.net/man/8/apt-get

What do you want, I am a native francophone, so I don't always succeed getting my point across clearly in English, especially when talking about "free" software.

You're right, I overlooked the advantages of Ubuntu being restriction-free. That's also a point in its favor.

However, having worked with Windows, OSX and Linux, I believe in that department, you do get what you pay for. The Windows and Mac OSX user experiences are backed up by years of professional research founded by big money, and it shows, compared to Linux. A good OS is one that doesn't get in my way, and Linux' only excuse for constantly doing so is that it is customizable. The best OS is the one I don't have to customize because it works better out of the box than I could ever customize it to. And that's Windows 7 for me. And I believe it's well worth the licensing hassle and price.

Hence, you get what you pay for, that's my stance.

They're the whole app essentially, and you can reinstall it from scratch. The additional benefit of most linux apps is that they're relatively small in size.



It's really easy mate, with a single click you can choose to "deselect all" and just scroll through the available updates selecting only the ones you want. Don't you think it's really convenient to have all the updates listed at a single spot instead of having to go through every app's individual update mechanism? And the exceptions, like the Sun Virtualbox app mentioned above is not really Ubuntu's fault.



I think you missed out on reading a certain except there : "The dist upgrade is because OO3 needs new libraries"

That answers your question about having to do a dist-upgrade - which will fetch all the new libs that are required for OOo 3x without you having to look for each of them individually. It's like when a Windows app uses a certain version of the VC++ libs, they ship the VC++ runtime alongwith the app, and it often doesn't ask the user whether or not he wants to install it. He may already have the redistributable installed, but the app still runs the redistributable installer nonetheless.

Besides, you had to download the installer executable for Windows too, so I don't really see what your point is.



I can't believe you're down to nitpicking now. If you do want to nitpick, you could've probably chosen a better and more relevant point. For an app that was installed using a .deb, all one needs to do is add it's repo to the source list -- and it works perfectly. I've added a few sources myself and have installed all the available updates for my apps (SMPlayer, the latest nVidia drivers [190.42] to name just two) and it's all been a breeze. Not a single error or issue. You're just grasping at straws mate and that is exactly what's irrelevant here.

I'm not flaming you, I hope you understand that ... but your counterpoints are really absurd.