10.10 is here. And for most of us, it's working quite splendidly. Unfortunately for one Ubuntu contributor (and quite a good one I might add) it's not.
Take a peek over at Martin's blog and read about how U-WOE has unfortunately become his "woe". http://doctormo.org/2010/10/14/maverick-upgrade-sigh/
But "Ubuntu Works On Everything." His case must surely be a corner case.
Before you jump all over Martin (or I) and say some variant of "my OS rulez more than yours" or "RTFM" (believe it or not, some abusive types do lurk in these spaces), please remember we're in Ubuntu-land where the Code of Conduct applies. Please also remember that U-WOE is a mythical land filled with unicorns and now meerkats too.
Still confused about what I'm talking about? Here's my introduction to U-WOE: http://randall.executiv.es/uwoe
Ok. So what?
Martin's experience suggests a few things to me. More like questions really:
1) System76. Where are you? Is 10.10 certified on your hardware? Why not?
2) Canonical. Where are you? The certification messaging around what *really* works with Ubuntu needs a lot more amplification. Shout it from the rooftops please. Hire more QA folks too ;)
3) OEM's. Where are you? Only 10 systems on the 10.10 certified list? Geez!
My thesis: U-WOE is potentially costing Canonical (and Ubuntu) customers. I hate that. When word on the street becomes “Ya I tried that Ubuntu and my driver this didn’t kernel that so I gave up”, it’s a losing proposition. More so when it's an Ubuntu developer who's stuck. Martin's a great guy. Please don't torture him this way. And read the punchline...
In order to “out-Apple Apple”, Canonical (with our help and encouragement) will indeed need to certify much more vigorously and market "Ubuntu Certified" much more loudly. That “fruit company in Cupertino” has understood this quite well for over 25 years and the customer sat results speak for themselves. (Ignore their other flaws please, just this once.)
Furthermore, as Ubuntu members, advocates, and everyday humans, we should be shouting our warnings of U-WOE to everyone we know, and pointing them to the "Ubuntu Certified Hardware" list at every opportunity! http://webapps.ubuntu.com/certification/
Or maybe of course not everything you read on the web isn't really true and the mythical land of U-WOE really does exist.
It remains a reader's exercise to prove me wrong.
Where are System76 and ZaReason? They're in the land of not wasting money on certifications. You don't get on hardware certification lists without shelling out a pile of dough, no matter how compatible your stuff is.
These OEMs show the inherent fragility in Canonical's chosen business plan as it comes to certification. These are arguable very (if not the most) popular OEMs that are supplying Ubuntu pre-installs. They are making a profit by leveraging Ubuntu, and providing Ubuntu supporters with excellent services as customers...but they do so without materially supporting Ubuntu development costs.
There is a deep disconnect there in revenue feedback and its hard to unravel as an Ubuntu supporter because there's no obvious _bad_ actor to point to to call out. Noone really wants any of these businesses fail and no one wants to see the prices of Ubuntu systems rise unnecessarily.
Canonical has purposefully made OEM services optional. Popular niche OEMs have done the math and decided they don't have to contract for those optional services. And in the short term things look fine, the OEMs grow their business. Users get access to quality Ubuntu pre-installed systems and the Ubuntu userbase grows. But in the long term there is a real danger here because there isn't a strong feedback loop that encourages these OEMs to drive an equitable amount of financial support to offset the costs of Ubuntu development.
I will say though that System76 is doing better than ZaReason in that they are putting Canonical's support offerings into the checkout process for servers. That's a very good thing to see from an OEM partner and they are at least acting as a support sales lead for Canonical direct to user suppport services by making it easy for server purchasers to find the support options at time of purchase.
-jef
Good question. You should ask them and see what they say.
Question:
How many Ubuntu users see value in certified hardware for personal use for something like a personal laptop? How many Ubuntu users are willing to refrain from purchasing uncertified hardware?
It seems to me the most popular Ubuntu pre-installed hardware that people like recommending to other people isn't necessarily certified. That's a problem. And its a problem that is only going to be solved by ubuntu users changing their habits as a consumers and start preferring and recommending certified hardware nearly exclusively.
-jef
Excellent point Jef.
We who recommend Ubuntu ought to always recommend certified hardware. Anything else should come with the caveat that "this may or may not work now or at any time in the future."
Actually... doesn't certified hardware come with that "in the future" caveat as well?
Certification of hardware is for a specific release.. not for the next X number of releases. At best certification lets you figure out what to buy off-the-shelf today...but does it really help you evaluate a hardware purchase that you expect to install a future version of Ubuntu on? Is there anything in the certification process for hardware purchased today that would provide assurance that the next release of Ubuntu would install properly on that hardware? I'm not sure there is.
Certification as a process feels very geared for LTS..where the primary usage lifetime before a technology refresh is on par with the LTS support lifetime. For computers which come pre-installed with non-LTS releases and are expected to see at least one additional future Ubuntu release update/install in its primary use lifespan its not clear that certification as it is currently done actually provides value there.
-jef
Quite true. I'd like to see a commitment from an OEM or two to re-test for a longer period. I'd also like to see Canonical ambitiously re-test with each release and even post the failures. (I'm dreaming perhaps;)
There is one thing for sure though: If a person buys a system today that is not certified for 10.04 LTS and also not certified for 10.10, then they are likely in for some deep woe. I think a large percentage of Ubuntu's user base in in this category.
Though I don't have the actual percentage of Ubuntu users running certified hardware, I do know that it's *much* less than 100%. That "fruit company in Cupertino" wins again ;) ... at least in this regard.
That fruit company is a hardware company..that happens to produce its own operating software for an increasing range of products. Comparing them to Canonical is literally an Apples to Oranges(and I guess Eggplants now after the Ubuntu rebranding) comparison.
If Canonical was an OEM managing a software project as part of overall product design (like HP is now going to be doing with WebOS and Nokia has been doing for years first under meamo and now with meego) then things would be different for sure. But Canonical isn't a hardware company at all. And the certification program doesn't appear to actual be providing value for OEMs providing retail consumer products. There's value there for servers where institutional consumers come in with higher purchasing _requirements_ than just word of mouth recommendations.
-jef
Actually I doubt that the "fruit company in Cupertino" is an OEM (hardware company) at all any more. But, I will say that they have strong control over their OEM's (and ODM's), unlike Canonical. And, they've proven that they understand system design and integration quite well.
They might not solder the boards anymore, but they design it and commission the hardware that does the soldering. They're as much an OEM as Dell is.
I prefer to label them (Apple) an OED (Original Equipment Designer). Technically they're not a manufacturer any more. Dell even less so.
You do realize that 10.10 just launched about 4 days ago. Certifications are ran against the gold media and take time. Do you really expect them to have been completed within 4 days on a lot of hardware?
Actually, I *do* expect more.
A release could be held for an additional interval (a short one) to ensure a reasonable number of certified systems. What's a reasonable number? Well, 10 seems too low. That's 2.5 per day at current rate. How many people are certifying these systems? How long does it take? How many (more) engineers would be needed to certify more quickly?
It would be different if we didn't see this release coming. The need to certify has been widely known for quite some time. Certainly there has been enough time to prepare for it.
I'd also expect to see some messaging to the effect of "We're certifying systems as quickly as we can. Please hold off on your 10.10 upgrade until we get to yours."
He wouldn't have had any problems if he did a proper install instead of upgrading.
Configuration files aren't handled in such a way that Ubuntu can pull that kind of stuff. They just aren't. They're not organized like that, they're not always specified in packages, some are hidden some aren't, some are in the user's home directory, some aren't, some are in *subdirectories* there, and some aren't. Some are in gconf. Some are in gconf schemas. It's a colossal mess and no one wants to admit it-- and as long as that's the case, I will NEVER recommend an in-place OS upgrade. They Just Don't Work.
Clean installs? GMA500 and outliers like that aside, yes, OWOE.
His blog indicates that he tried both ways, and both failed (in different ways).
I do agree that clean installs are generally a good idea though.
10.0.4 is the LTS, most users should stick to that, and OEMs stick to the LTS as they are supported for longer and *usually* have less bugs - 8.0.4 was a bit ragged. Also most Linux people I talk to don't say "Ubuntu works on everything" - it's usually "linux works on everything"
I think you mean 10.04 LTS. Still, having only 10 OEM's on board for 10.10 is problematic.
The L-WOE crowd and the U-WOE crowd seem to have quite a large overlap ;)
Post new comment