| Why Google And Ubuntu Don't Say "Linux" From ZDNet by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols:
The most popular mobile operating system is Android. One of the most popular non-Windows operating systems is Canonical's Ubuntu. And, Google's is really pushing its Chrome OS-powered Chromebooks in the retail market. What does all this have in common? Each operating system is based on Linux and neither Google nor Canonical is mentioning that fact.
I understand exactly why Google and Canonical are doing this.
Think about it. If you're a Linux user, what do you think of when you hear "Linux." You think about stability, security, open-source, flexibility, power, and control.
But, now what do the 95% plus of the population who don't use Linux directly think about it when they hear "Linux." They think, hard-to-use, command-line, something that only a techie geek—and I don't mean that in a fun Big Bang Theory kind of way—could use, never mind enjoy using.
You see this isn't about reality. It's about perception. Canonical and Google rather than try to fight how Linux is seen by most people and the Microsoft trolls who do their best to keep the Linux lies alive, have chosen to dodge the Linux brand issue entirely.
Hence, Google emphasizes Android and Chrome OS and Canonical talks about Ubuntu. They're doing this because this works. By doing this, they avoid all the negative FUD that Microsoft fans and trolls keep throwing at Linux and they get to set the conversation.
For those of who are Linux fans, it's annoying. We should keep in mind though that the end goal is getting Linux into the hands of users. If they happen to call it Android, Chrome OS, or Ubuntu is that really such a bad thing? I don't think so. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Fairpoint Commun..
| I do pretty much agree about the perception that 95% of the users have, being hard to use and you may have to use the command line to get things done.
Sure, the latest version of GNOME 2 (not GNOME 3), MATE, Cinnamon, and KDE did came a long way in times of ease-of-use and user-friendliness, but the perception of Linux being hard to use and require a command line still stand.
What about if average user who have never used Linux before want to have their own home server? I don't know about ClearOS versus Windows Home Server. For businesses, Linux server-based distributions cannot be compared to Windows Server 2003, 2008, and 2008 R2 except for the server core installation for both 2008 and 2008 R2.
Hmm... How about this?
»www.techbroil.com/2011/12/linux-···011.html
--
Phone: Yealink SIP-T22P + CSipSimple in Optimus V
Phone System: Asterisk 10.1; Server: Debian Sid+Exp
I'm in heaven with VoIP except for 3G wireless. |
|
 wmcbrine213 251 145 96
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
kudos:1 | reply to FF4m3
Ubuntu used to mention it. But as I skim Ubuntu.com now, the word isn't exactly leaping out at me. Hmm.
Anyway, despite all the complaints about Unity, I'd still consider Ubuntu to be basically a standard Linux environment. Android is not; it's its own thing, using Linux, but not really living in the Linux world.
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
|
| said by wmcbrine:Ubuntu used to mention it. But as I skim Ubuntu.com now, the word isn't exactly leaping out at me. Hmm. Yep. I hadn't noticed this till I read the article. Interesting. |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to FF4m3
in a way no different than how up through Windows ME, Consumer grade Windows had always just been a wrapper for DOS.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
 JohnInSJPremium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·Comcast
| reply to FF4m3
said by FF4m3 :I understand exactly why Google and Canonical are doing this.
The same reason OS X isn't "Darwin" or "Mach"
Android is the experience, Linux is the boiler room that makes the experience possible. No one cares about the boiler room 
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
| reply to FF4m3
said by FF4m3 :
Think about it. If you're a Linux user, what do you think of when you hear "Linux." You think about stability, security, , flexibility, power, and control.
One thing never enters into what I think about in this "open source." Its not a consideration. Matter of fact its a good think to just keep that part to your self. That term brings up some of the bad things too.
said by FF4m3 :
mean that in a fun Big Bang Theory kind of
Knock Penny! Knock Penny! Knock Penny! 
said by FF4m3 :
For those of who are Linux fans, it's annoying. We should keep in mind though that the end goal is getting Linux into the hands of users. If they happen to call it Android, Chrome OS, or Ubuntu is that really such a bad thing? I don't think so.
MMhmmemmeememmememem aauuauuaua mmmmm...
Well as not a fan of chrome OS or chrome, I view it in the same light as ms antics of getting people locked into something... I thought chromebooks might be the answer for some field force stuff... but two things killed it:
1) Certain tasks were just not ready for prime time at the time the chromebooks hit the street.
And the deal breaker...
2) Getting google to follow up on actually purchasing these things was a plain and utter mess. Took for ever for follow up and by that time we had moved on. Too late the contract went elsewhere.
And whats the point of chrome os AND ANDROID?
Android would at this point seem to be the better choice in this space. (?)
mmmmmm uhhhhhhh aaaaa ...
back to the question is it a bad thing.... . . there are degrees of bad and good to this...
*buntu/canoncial has never been my fav (yes there is few that are   ) hence why I've used a *buntu derivative for a long time... when I hear "ubuntu" it bring to mind that idiotic stinky foot DE and more recently that even more asinine "unity" and wayland crap.
I guess the good is that it gets Linux into Jane User hands/desktops.. but if they choose the wrong flavor they may just have an even worse opinion than they started with!
Overall I guess "ubuntu" is a positive in getting Jane User to use Linux...
Android... while it may be Linux "based" its more unto its own branch in my not so humble opinion....but google and some of its antics on some other things (non Android ie: igoogle) is really starting to irritate me and this will harm Androids "cred/rep", add in that google is not stepping into help put the fist of iron down on crapple and others... Yeah I don't like the way the battle has to be fought on this crap either, but that choice has been made and is out of googles control, hence the Motorola buy... that was 100% a patent purhcase, period.
Samsung jack the rates up on chips to crapple! Or pull the plug on them entirely!
Does Jane User know that Android is based on Linux? ? ? ? ? I doubt it. And more importantly Jane User does NOT CARE!
So does Linux need a "brand makeover" like NYNEX/Bell Atlantic to Verizon? ?
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
 markofmayhemWhy not now?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5 | "Linux" is associated with a .... certain "crowd".
Example above. |
|
| said by markofmayhem:
"Linux" is associated with a .... certain "crowd".
Example above.
Pot meet kettle.
Example above.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
|
|
markofmayhemWhy not now?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by TuxRaiderPen: said by markofmayhem:
"Linux" is associated with a .... certain "crowd".
Example above.
Pot meet kettle. Example above. 4th of July appropriate: cookware, colors, and fireworks! lol
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | reply to FF4m3
Haven't we seen this movie before?
Oh, yeah: Stallman complaining that no-one mentions "GNU" when they say "Linux". |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Yep, seen it a couple times, not a bad movie.
That hearkens to another point, "Linux" is just the kernel, ubuntu is the operating system. Same thing with windows, you never hear anyone call it NT they use the OS name(ie xp, 7, 8). When people say "duurr you have to call it linux" its really no better than stallman's obsessive gnu/linux or gnu+linux line. |
|
markofmayhemWhy not now?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5 | I guess this wouldn't the best thread to insert my rant of leaving "IBM" off all of it? |
|
| reply to FF4m3
Here's a good overview of the naming debate (which the vast majority of users don't care about) if anyone cares to read it:
GNU/Linux Naming Controversy |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | tl;dr "free software" does not include the freedom to forget to mention Richard Stallman |
|
| Thanks for the info. |
|
 nwrickertsand groperPremium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
kudos:7
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to dave
said by dave:"free software" does not include the freedom to forget to mention Richard Stallman
That I rarely mention Stallman has nothing to do with forgetting.
--
AT&T Uverse; Zyxel NBG334W router (behind the 2wire gateway); openSuSE 12.1; firefox 13.0 |
|
| reply to me1212
said by me1212:
That hearkens to another point, "Linux" is just the kernel, ubuntu is the operating system. Same thing with windows, you never hear anyone call it NT they use the OS name(ie xp, 7, 8). When people say "duurr you have to call it linux" its really no better than stallman's obsessive gnu/linux or gnu+linux line.
First, Jane User does not know that only the kernel is called "technically" Linux. And its not promoted this why by various distros.
And more importantly, with out the rest of the bits, X, BASH etc.. its not really an OS in the sense that Jane User understands. (NOPE hold that idea, and read below!)
Side: Note there is a winstupper NT which went by NT, NT Workstation. I just threw all the 3.5" disks out for it during the summer infestation cleansing... feels great to get that filth out of here!
Second, its NOT ever, never, ever, and WONT be "GNU" anything! Linus has spoken its Linux, period. Full stop. Done, Over, Finished. End.
said by FF4m3 :
Here's a good overview of the naming debate (which the vast majority of users don't care about)
DING! DING DING DING DING! Winner!
The only reason I have an issue is when the FSF and rms cajoule some one like Debian into this BS. Debian has its own deamons to excorsize, DFSG, and adding the FSF and rms "GNU"sense is just another headache they don't need. Move on from it and drop the "GNU!"
said by dave:
"free software" does not include the freedom
I don't think that means what you think it does. Free software is that, free, no cost, gratis.
said by dave:
to forget to mention Richard Stallman
I forget about him all the time, till he creeps up on some tech news site.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | said by TuxRaiderPen:
Second, its NOT ever, never, ever, and WONT be "GNU" anything! Linus has spoken its Linux, period. Full stop. Done, Over, Finished. End.
Thats my point, Linus made linux, a gpl kernel. Other companies or people use it to make their own 'linux distribution' which they name as they see fit. Canonical made Ubuntu, an operating system that uses the linux kernel. They don't call it linux+ubuntu they call it simply ubuntu. |
|
markofmayhemWhy not now?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Comcast
| LiGNUx??? Oh dear... I don't remember that, glad it died quickly.
»www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html
Nut case. You lost, Richard, you lost... Hurd never made it out of the gate and many of the other GNU projects have acceptible and widely used alternatives. This is the FSF, anarchist mouthpieces surrounded by a conceided sore loser.
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix |
|
