Why do so many people like ubuntu?


For Debian based disto I like MX Linux the best. Actually I have both, Manjaro and MX Linux and I like both very much.


Correct. Instead, Mass has commonality with Energy… :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Sorry @jonathon; sending myself to the naughty corner right now, & will go to bed tonight sans pudding.


That JSM quote’s a perfect example of why i’ll take physics over philosophy any day.


There are really good things about Ubuntu.

  1. Enterprise level quality - it is supported by canonical. Look at how they have implemented error reporting, it has that pro feel to it
  2. Documentation - there is a detailed documentation available on Ubuntu ( wiki etc) and it’s maintained.
  3. Community support - there is plenty of support available on forums, fan sites etc

And to be honest it’s a good distro.


Those scientist who claim that they don’t have any philosophy of science actually just have a very bad one.
– Albert Einstein

But the quote of JS Mill is hillarious, indeed! The best thing about it is when first year students start trying to defend it.


By god … I havent read Utilitarianism in … well lets just say double-digit years.
But I dont remember that quote. :sweat_smile:


I think people switch to Ubuntu and is well known because if you write “newbie linux” every link says ubuntu is the most similar to windows and newbie friendly (imo manjaro as an example is more user friendly than ubuntu).
So mostly is propaganda (nowadays)


IMO Ubuntu is quite a good distro. In most cases it just works after the installation. Of course, there are still some things to set up later, but in general it works.
Just an example: even though Ubuntu doesn’t support Optimus out of the box it doesn’t mean there would be issues related to Nvidia hardware after the installation, while many other distros may provide you with various problems. I have tried new Solus and Fedora Atomic Workstation recently, and both were having this kind of message during reboot: “Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on %cpunumber%” with system becoming absolutely irresponsive. Some googling revealed that that might had been due to nouveau driver - even if it’s true, frankly speaking I just don’t care. It’s a shame - that’s what I think.
And by the way, that word LOCKUP sounds pretty similar to a better one which describes this situation completely - if you know what I mean. A total… LOCKUP, lol.
This is one more reason why I always laugh when I encounter the next Fedora fanboy who says something unpleasant towards a good distro which in fact made Linux at least more popular that it was ever before.


And they used to make really swell coffee cup coasters…


Silverblue’s got a few unique installation fails at present. But it does exit rather gracefully. :sob:


Yeah, there are several failures during the installation process in recent builds.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Fedora and many things they do and I’d really love to test its “the latest and the greatest”…


LOL! So far, in my short time using Fedora & Silverblue 28, and testing 29 alpha/betas, I’ve come to the conclusion testing “latest ‘n’ greatest” is easier in Arch. I’ve avoided Fedora since I started using Linux, which was pre-Fedora (but not RH). I went through enough ‘dependency hell’ with Mandrake and the old SuSE to want to avoid RPM-based distros like the plague. Now I’m finding that may still be a good decision. :wink:

Fedora is rough, man. I mean rough-as-a-cobble-stone-street rough! (But I hear 27 was better.) And I still would not be using it if it were not for the promises Silverblue holds, and I don’t have to educate you on what they are. And it is even rougher than Fedora Workstation itself, considering the lack of documentation.

In a way, Silverblue documentation reminds me of how we built “The Largest Beef Packing Plant in the World.” We just built it–based on past packing plant designs sketched out on cocktail napkins–then we drew up the blueprints after the job was done (MBPXL, Dodge City, KS, 1980).

The only thing that makes me fairly comfortable testing Silverblue in its current state is having some experience in Arch. I totally discount a few years of Ubuntu early on. I’m not sure I learned anything at all from it, other than the existence of sudo. :wink:

Ubuntu is to Linux what Facebook is to ‘The Internet.’ :wink:


Even worse than facebook Ubuntu started very well did a lot for Linux, Till it started Ubuntu is Linux and it became a dictatorship to its users.


Fedora Workstation 28 is actually smooth as butter, except when I went digging into TPM, Secure Boot, and using TPM tools and Mokutil. Documentation is there…from the beginning. In some respects it is hard to tell what does and does not apply in Fedora from edition to edition, unsurprisingly the Archwiki was helpful in helping me get that sorted.


Even the once great Gentoo refers to the Arch wiki now that does say something


Oh, man! That’s the distro I started with as a newcomer in Linux world. I don’t even remember what year it was, I guess 2001. It was such a new and intriguing experience so I just cannot say anything bad towards it. But to say the truth, you are right.


Since I was referencing Silverblue, you are entirely correct, the documention has been there from the beginning, in bits and pieces strung out over the web.

Silverblue is based on several linked technologies and began so recently the documentation is far, far from being complete. But since Fedora’s goal is to be feature-complete with Silverblue 30, next February, then perhaps the docs will be nearer completion by then, as well.



I started with Mandrake and Suse, but could never connect to the net with them, went back to Xp then 2004 found a little know Arch rolling release well it connected fine but took another year to get it installed fell in love used Arch ever since.
Ubuntu was great in the 1st 3years then just made wrong decisions from then on in.


I honestly don’t understand technical people who like ubuntu that much, I know a few but honestly I had many shortcomings with Ubuntu. I also don’t dig the NIH syndrome some of their tech has, and that some of their projects seem to be made only for Ubuntu, like unity for example,to me that is a big no no. Even elementaryOs devs have opened up their DE to other distros lately.

1- popularity
2- availability of support because of popularity
3- money that helps boost that popularity?

Still Ubuntu is not bad per se, it just depends on who you are and what do you want to do with it. It is quite good in terms of ease of use and hardware support.

To give you an example, my mom is 74 years and she is a huge fan of Ubuntu. She often asks me to download her the latest iso and put it on a USB stick, then she installs it herself. And she does it as soon as the new release comes out! Sometimes she messes up her system and somehow fixes it again, and in rare cases she asks me for help with something that didn’t go well (like once a year or so). And since she has settled with it, and it works for her, why should she change?


its easy, or so it looks, they get support, other ppl recognize it, its like social signaling for linux
friendly and helpful forum and support, untill some time now.
its backed by a company