ubuntu Ubuntu 14.04 Will Power

[Turk.]

By Jon Brodkin Apr 18 2014, 2:02am AEST
"Trusty Tahr" also brings long term support to desktops and servers.

From May 2013, a tablet running an early version of Ubuntu Touch.
Canonical today is releasing Ubuntu 14.04, a Long Term Support (LTS) edition for desktops and servers and an update to the versions of Ubuntu for phones and tablets.

LTS editions are released once every two years and receive five years of support from Canonical and thus gain wider adoption in businesses than the less stable server and desktop editions that come out every six months.

The default 14.04 desktop running in a virtual machine.
Upgrade from Windows XP

Canonical CEO Jane Silber pitched Ubuntu 14.04 for desktops as a good option for businesses "considering a switch from Microsoft, and specifically those replacing XP or Windows 7 as they come to the end of life.? 14.04 comes with some new security features, including new AppArmor profiles and policies and "improvements for interprocess communications between confined applications."
Source

[Max Norris]

Canonical CEO Jane Silber pitched Ubuntu 14.04 for desktops as a good option for businesses "considering a switch from Microsoft, and specifically those replacing XP or Windows 7 as they come to the end of life.?

Ok.. I get XP obviously, but Windows 7?  Erm Windows 7 doesn't hit EOL until 2020... this LTS would have been out of support for a year by then.

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Ok.. I get XP obviously, but Windows 7?  Erm Windows 7 doesn't hit EOL until 2020... this LTS would have been out of support for a year by then.

Well, it seems to me they are after getting people off Microsoft entirely. Windows 7 is great, in my view. I was using Ubuntu on my laptop from 2007 until last Christmas. I still use it on my studio and media PCs. But last Christmas I bought a Toshiba laptop and tried to get all manner of versions of Linux to work on it, but none did (lesson? avoid Toshiba if you want something other than Windows), so I've been stuck with Windows 8 (now 8.1, though I'm one of those who is having problems with the Update version). What makes Windows 8 tolerable and quite good actually for me is Start8 and ModernMix. I think that, even if I can eventually get the Update working, I'll still at least want Start8 (seriously!).

 

But the goal of Ubuntu is to get people on their track. The LTS (Long Term Support--ie, five years) version comes along every two years, and it will, as they say and as it actually has to be, always be free (minus any support costs you may have or, well, even with Linux, advances in software are still going to leave older hardware behind).

 

Frankly, if I were to start a business, I'd go with Ubuntu or another flavour of Linux (and most hardware out there that works with it), knowing that in the end the update/maintenance costs would be lower.

 

I mean, we'll see the next free five-year-support version of Ubuntu in 2016 and then one in 2018 and 2020 and so on. That, I think, is what Silber is talking about.

 

I understand that Microsoft are moving to make their phone version of Windows free (with the understanding they'll make money off people's searches and all, as Google do with Android). But will Microsoft move desktop Windows in that direction? If not, then perhaps Silber is making serious business sense.

 

Does it all come down to Bill Gates's view that any software that is not paid for (at least up front) is not worth considering for Microsoft a view that is substainable for that company? It seems to me that, if Microsoft could make all their software free and claw back revenue from searches, they may ultimately have a future in this new market. On my office Mac, I got Mavericks for free. I'm guessing that this wasn't an entirely altruistic gesture on the part of Apple.

[McKay]

I understand that Microsoft are moving to make their phone version of Windows free (with the understanding they'll make money off people's searches and all, as Google do with Android). But will Microsoft move desktop Windows in that direction? If not, then perhaps Silber is making serious business sense.

 

Does it all come down to Bill Gates's view that any software that is not paid for (at least up front) not worth considering for Microsoft a view that is substainable for that company? It seems to me that, if Microsoft could make all their software free and claw back revenue from searches, they may ultimately have a future in this new market. On my office Mac, I got Mavericks for free. I'm guessing that this wasn't an entirely altruistic gesture on the part of Apple.

 

 

If Microsoft sold Desktop PC's then sure they could make Windows "free" on it, by absorbing the cost with the price of the hardware like Apple do with OS X. Until that day they won't simply give it away.

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

If Microsoft sold Desktop PC's then sure they could make Windows "free" on it, by absorbing the cost with the price of the hardware like Apple do with OS X. Until that day they won't simply give it away.

You're right about Apple. But what about Google and Android? They bought Motorola for its patents, kept the patents they wanted, and sold it to Lenovo. What's that all about if not a faith in the 'free' model?

[neo1911]

Update/Maintenance costs are lower but what about training costs and availability of other required software?

[Romero]

Speaking of the 'free' model and Microsoft, they have already made Windows Phone and Windows free for all smartphones and tablets below 9 inches (and also Windows IoT for when Intel's hardware is available).

[McKay]

You're right about Apple. But what about Google and Android? They bought Motorola for its patents, kept the patents they wanted, and sold it to Lenovo. What's that all about if not a faith in the 'free' model?

 

Google license the Google Apps to companies to include on their phones, but Googles main source of income with Android comes from gathering data about user habits and interests to sell to advertising companies etc. 

 

I don't think that would be a sustainable business model for Microsoft to use on Windows.

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Update/Maintenance costs are lower but what about training costs and availability of other required software?

 

I was including training there (availability is a non-starter, as this stuff is easy to download and even easier to deploy).

Speaking of the 'free' model and Microsoft, they have already made Windows Phone and Windows free for all smartphones and tablets below 9 inches (and also Windows IoT for when Intel's hardware is available).

 

As I said... :D

Google license the Google Apps to companies to include on their phones, but Googles main source of income with Android comes from gathering data about user habits and interests to sell to advertising companies etc. 

 

I don't think that would be a sustainable business model for Microsoft to use on Windows.

And Bing's doesn't come from such a source? Why wouldn't that be a sustainable model, given that people gladly give that stuff away when they use Bing, Google, Facebook, whatever? I'd invest in it if I had two pennies to rub together.

[McKay]

I was including training there (availability is a non-starter, as this stuff is easy to download and even easier to deploy).

 

As I said... :D

And Bing's doesn't come from such a source? Why wouldn't that be a sustainable model, given that people gladly give that stuff away when they use Bing, Google, Facebook, whatever? I'd invest in it if I had two pennies to rub together.

 

Bing is a big drain of Money for Microsoft. Android isn't just Google Search, it monitors your behaviour, the places you visit, the things you do with your phone, the apps you download. Basically every little thing you do on your phone, Google uses to build a comprehensive profile about you that Advertising companies want. 

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Bing is a big drain of Money for Microsoft. Android isn't just Google Search, it monitors your behaviour, the places you visit, the things you do with your phone, the apps you download. Basically every little thing you do on your phone, Google uses to build a comprehensive profile about you that Advertising companies want. 

Bing monitor what you are up to as well, same as Google; otherwise, it wouldn't be making the most of its assets. If it's a drain, that's down to the fact that they tried (but couldn't) to get people to say 'Just bing it!' when everyone has already been conditioned to say 'Just google it!' Seriously, this is the level we're talking about here.

[McKay]

Bing monitor what you are up to as well, same as Google; otherwise, it wouldn't be making the most of its assets. If it's a drain, that's down to the fact that they tried (but couldn't) to get people to say 'Just bing it!' when everyone has already been conditioned to say 'Just google it!' Seriously, this is the level we're talking about here.

 

I know that, I'm saying Bing can't monitor you on the level that Android as an OS does. Bing can't create as detailed a picture of you as Android can, nearly every aspect of Android can help build a picture of what you are as a person, as a potential customer. Cortana will help because it's powered by Bing, but Outlook/Hotmail don't scan your emails to use for advertising (Something Microsoft brag about). 

[nitins60]

Bing monitor what you are up to as well, same as Google; otherwise, it wouldn't be making the most of its assets. If it's a drain, that's down to the fact that they tried (but couldn't) to get people to say 'Just bing it!' when everyone has already been conditioned to say 'Just google it!' Seriously, this is the level we're talking about here.

 

 

I do see that you favour Linux irrespective of how good Microsoft is.

I don't understand one point

 

"People wants everything for FREE. But they want to be PAID more in their job".

 

Everyone says Corporate Companies are greedy. In my view, it's not companies, it's the people from Begger to Billionaire every one is greedy. Everyone wants more. Typically the same people are sitting in those companies and running them.

 

An Investor puts 1$ into share market and expects the company to give 10$ by the end of the day, but when the same person is the victim of the company, they brag about it.

 

Funny world, just my 2 cents. In my view, FREE is not a good thing unless this world get rid of MONEY

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

I know that, I'm saying Bing can't monitor you on the level that Android as an OS does. Bing can't create as detailed a picture of you as Android can, nearly every aspect of Android can help build a picture of what you are as a person, as a potential customer. Cortana will help because it's powered by Bing, but Outlook/Hotmail don't scan your emails to use for advertising (Something Microsoft brag about). 

I don't honestly know how I feel about this. I like to think that Google scan my emails (or at least the attachments) for viruses, but I don't like their machines 'reading' my emails to pimp their ads and sharing personal information with outside authorities (I don't have anything to hide, but that's never the point). Are you saying that Microsoft clean my emails of viruses but don't scan the actual content of my emails for advertising or other purposes?

 

Sorry for my ignorance here, but are you saying they are bragging about protecting my privacy--that they aren't involved in sharing my information with government authorities? How would that be possible legally, or at least, given the current nature of the marketplace, even economically sensible?

[McKay]

I don't honestly know how I feel about this. I like to think that Google scan my emails (or at least the attachments) for viruses, but I don't like their machines 'reading' my emails to pimp their ads and sharing personal information with outside authorities (I don't have anything to hide, but that's never the point). Are you saying that Microsoft clean my emails of viruses but don't scan the actual content of my emails for advertising or other purposes?

 

Sorry for my ignorance here, but are you saying they are bragging about protecting my privacy--that they aren't involved in sharing my information with government authorities? How would that be possible legally, or at least, given the current nature of the marketplace, even economically sensible?

 

Microsoft brag about not scanning your emails, with their whole "Scroogled" campaign. Google scan emails on Gmail for keywords that they think are interests etc, and use them to aim ads at you. Personally I don't care that Google use Android to monitor my activity to build an advertising profile, between getting Viagra ads, or getting ads for things I care about, I will choose the latter. I use adblock on my phone, tablet and Chrome so I don't see those ads anyway. (I should add for the purpose of rulebreaking that Neowin is on a Whitelist  :shiftyninja: )

[+Red King Subscriber²]

We already have android.

[Gerowen]

Just upgraded my desktop PC.  No major changes so far.  Interface seems a little snappier.  Should be a good solid OS for me to sit on for a while.  Since this one is LTS, I don't think I'll bother upgrading to 14.10 unless there is just some awesome new features in it.

[McKay]

We already have android.

 

Android wouldn't make Canonical any money. Ubuntu would.

[ichi]

I'm not really into Canonical's design, from icons to the whole desktop  :/ it's not bad, but just not my thing. I don't see myself using a tablet or phone with Canonical's UI.

[Gerowen]

I'm not really into Canonical's design, from icons to the whole desktop  :/ it's not bad, but just not my thing. I don't see myself using a tablet or phone with Canonical's UI.

It took me a little while to get used to it.  I even tried switching to Xubuntu, but I really got used to being able to search for "anything" with the Unity button and came back.  You can start typing and it will start generating results and separate them into categories (Applications, Web Search, Files, etc.)  It's not for everybody though.  I personally liked the non-3D version of Gnome shell when I used Debian 7 for a while, but I've just gotten used to Unity.

[PGHammer]

I'm not really into Canonical's design, from icons to the whole desktop  :/ it's not bad, but just not my thing. I don't see myself using a tablet or phone with Canonical's UI.

That is just Unity (which is a remixed GNOME Shell).  There are other 'buntus (Kubuntu, for example, is my own personal favorite, entirely due to KDE as opposed to either Unity or straight GNOME).

 

And note Unity's target - the same hardware that ModernUI is used on today - tablets/phablets/phones/AIOs/etc.  (And it's not necessarily - or even - ARM-based hardware, either; look at the cost of the x86-based versions of all the above except phones.  While you may not necessarily want Unity as a phone or tablet/phablet UI, could you see LXDE or even KDE on a tablet? None of them - not even Unity - look remotely like Android.)

 

Gerowen - and in what way is Unity (as a UX, mind you) different from ModernUI?

 

That Unity is accepted at all nowadays is a far cry from the early opinions of either GNOME Shell or Unity - when both were massively despised and scorned.  Could it be that the UX is acceptable as long as it's NOT from the "work company" - Microsoft?

[ichi]

That is just Unity (which is a remixed GNOME Shell).  There are other 'buntus (Kubuntu, for example, is my own personal favorite, entirely due to KDE as opposed to either Unity or straight GNOME).

 

Indeed, I'm using Ubuntu with Gnome Shell on the desktop, but I don't think I'd get to choose when it comes to tablets.

 

That Unity is accepted at all nowadays is a far cry from the early opinions of either GNOME Shell or Unity - when both were massively despised and scorned.  Could it be that the UX is acceptable as long as it's NOT from the "work company" - Microsoft?

 

 

Well, I don't know. I'm not digging Unity (or Gnome Shell either, actually) but if I have to choose from the current crop of desktop environments I'll rather stick with Gnome.

 

As much as I dislike the touch-friendly approach of their respective app menus at least the actual window management remains basically the same as before, which even with the new modified window tittle bars in Gnome is still far more flexible that anything I've ever seen in Windows  :/

[tiagosilva29]

Well, I don't know. I'm not digging Unity (or Gnome Shell either, actually) but if I have to choose from the current crop of desktop environments I'll rather stick with Gnome.

 

As much as I dislike the touch-friendly approach of their respective app menus at least the actual window management remains basically the same as before, which even with the new modified window tittle bars in Gnome is still far more flexible that anything I've ever seen in Windows  :/

I still can't eat the UXD nightmare Canonical keeps serving on its user-base.

At this point a mix of GNOME and elementary OS features with a good amount of salt would do wonders.

[Deihmos]

Businesses making a switch to Ubuntu. That would be an IT nightmare.