Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 15 minutes later[^][v]#286,176
Games, apps and marketing.
Rainbow !DASHqGnDdc joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 18 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^][v]#286,177
They tried to realise the age of the Linux desktop instead of jumping on the mobile market.
Ishikawa !Et8Dragonk joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#286,181
I'm debating partitioning for ubuntu...
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,183
@previous (Ishikawa !Et8Dragonk)
I'm very happy using 11.10 on my main box. Despite all the criticisms of Unity, I'm actually okay with it. It's a good start for a new interface and most of the really obnoxious bugs have finally been ironed out. I can actually visualize where Unity is trying to go. Wish I could say the same for GNOME 3.
Meta !PARAdoxiHw joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,216
They're operating systems designed for two entirely different uses. It would be like making a thread about Windows CE vs Windows 7, or iOS vs Mac OS X.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,226
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
They are currently competing over the tablet market.
dw !AIy/L67q.s joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 12 hours later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,291
> They're operating systems designed for two entirely different uses. It would be like making a thread about Windows CE vs Windows 7, or iOS vs Mac OS X.
this
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 23 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,292
> They're operating systems designed for two entirely different uses. It would be like making a thread about Windows CE vs Windows 7, or iOS vs Mac OS X.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,293
@286,291 (dw !AIy/L67q.s)
I'm looking at this from a strategy perspective. Android made inroads into a market dominated by Apple and became the preferred choice of hardware manufacturers. Ubuntu failed to make inroads into a market dominated by MS and was shunned by hardware manufacturers. I feel we can learn something from the differences.
(Edited 7 minutes later.)
dw !AIy/L67q.s replied with this 14 years ago, 42 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,302
@previous (A)
that's because android has several multi-million dollar companies behind it
Rainbow !DASHqGnDdc replied with this 14 years ago, 51 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^][v]#286,308
I read a while ago that some netbooks sell with Ubuntu on them
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 14 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,372
@286,226 (F) > They are currently competing over the tablet market.
I sell computers for a living, and I have not seen any Ubuntu tablets from any major manufacturer.
While there are Windows 7 tablets, they suck and no one buys them because the OS is unsuitable for tablet use. I'd say Android is the best tablet OS, and the Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9 is the best tablet (or ASUS Eeepad Slider if you need a physical keyboard).
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
dw !AIy/L67q.s replied with this 14 years ago, 31 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,383
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
transformer prime > all
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 49 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,388
@286,372 (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
Okay, perhaps "currently competing" is a bit strong. However, Canonical has certainly been lining up to compete for a while now. The new Ubuntu geek trend is making Ubuntu distros work on existingtablets and their own stuff. With the geeks and developers already doing it, the 14.04 release is set to be aimed specifically at phones and tablets. In any case, Canonical has been making slow and steady progress in this direction over the past year, and it is now hard to say that the operating systems are designed for two entirely different uses.
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 14 years ago, 29 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,389
@previous (F)
I'm sure with some UI modifications and streamlining that Ubuntu would make a lovely tablet/phone OS. But Android is already dominant in phones, and gaining in tablets. That being said, who knows what the situation will look like in April 2014 but I think Canonical should stay focused on the desktop. If they work out a way to make Android apps run on it, then it has a greater chance of success.
advi !!3gpAcg/hF joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,399
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#286,400
@286,389 (Meta !PARAdoxiHw) > I think Canonical should stay focused on the desktop
Word. I wish this were the case. A lot of us have been watching the "make your desktop work like a smartphone" trend in UI with growing frustration.
> If they work out a way to make Android apps run on it
Running Android apps in Ubuntu through an emulator has been possible for a few years. Running them natively has been an issue because of hardware (GPS, sensors, SIM card, display) and platform (getting apps to work within a windowing system which doesn't exist on mobile devices) differences. However, this will no doubt steadily change as Ubuntu edges more toward the mobile device market.
Anonymous H replied with this 14 years ago, 23 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#286,676
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#286,704
It's Apple who fucked up, not Canonical.
At the time Ubuntu was announced, Microsoft had long-standing license agreements with virtually every PC maker out there. With the sole exception of Apple, of course. This put MS in position to punish hardware makers for supporting the enemy. There was almost no practical incentive for upsetting the staus quo, but there were big potential losses.
In the case of iPhone, mobile hardware makers had nothing to lose and everything to gain. The smartphone revolution promised to usher in a future where they'd find themselves selling nothing but second-rate product. Enter Android. It was buggy. It was fragmented. But none of that really matters in life or death situations, now does it? Hardware makers despreately needed Android to work, and so they made it work.
Android is fucking over iOS the same way XP fucked over Mac OS.
(Edited 9 minutes later.)
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 14 years ago, 53 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#286,710
@previous (J)
Android vs iOS is essentially the same conflict as Windows vs Mac OS. One OS only runs on one company's hardware in a closed ecosystem, the other OS runs on anyone's hardware. Android will be the Windows of smartphones. It's important to remember that Apple doesn't want to be the market leader, and they are perfectly content to have a small market share. There's no conspiracy that made Windows #1, Apple could have easily had that spot if they allowed their operating system to be run on other manufacturers' hardware.
Apple tried licensing their OS to other manufacturers in the 1990s, and it ended badly because they could undercut Apple on price, depriving Apple of the hardware profits they needed to fund the software side. The Apple business model needs the hardware and the software to be made by the same company. Now that Steve Jobs is dead, it will be interesting to see what Apple does with regard to this.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 40 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#286,712
Hipster type-B versus Neckbeard.
thats all there is to say on this subject
Handel !khEOdtKF56 joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 18 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#286,872
> t's important to remember that Apple doesn't want to be the market leader, and they are perfectly content to have a small market share.
And that's where I stopped reading. What a retarded statement to make.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 17 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#287,257
@previous (Handel !khEOdtKF56)
Didn't you know Apple is perfect? They never do anythnig wrong, at least according to fanboys.
Truth is Apple is arrogant. They never believed Android would emerge as a serious competitor to iOS, and so they never saw the need to license the OS to meet consumer demand. Most of their own developers are still blindly insisting Android is somehow second rate despite it now being the preferred choice of consumers world wide.
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 14 years ago, 10 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#287,440
@previous (J)
They're Apple, and that's all they'll ever need to sell their products.