--- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, Roy <linuxcanuck@...> wrote:
>
> It is not unusual for an Ubuntu based distribution to refer to Ubuntu
> rather than Debian even though Ubuntu is a spin off of Debian.
>
> Most users not care where apt originated. They do not care about Linux and
> its history or petty turf wars. They only want to use their computers
> without hassles. When we split hairs over the wording of a review it is
> divisive and will not help Debian or hurt Ubuntu. It only confuses users.
Most users don't run Linux. I don't know how misleading anyone is going to dispel any confusion either.
>
> Although Synaptic is not included by default, apt-get is. As mentioned by
> you, Synaptic is easily installable. It is the first app that I install
> with any of the *buntus. I refuse to use SC and either use apt or Synaptic
> for all of my installation. It isn't that SC is bad so much as it does not
> provide the information that I need, such as a list of dependencies and the
> source.
>
> There are few polished distributions that are based on Debian stable. I
> would know as I have tried them all. I also like the six month release
> cycle and look forward to testing alphas and betas. People should feel free
> to what works for them and to discuss their distros without having the
> thought police come after them. We need to ease up and not get hung up on
> terms and wording. It just distracts from discussion and adds little.
All I want to add is credit where it is due. Now that that is done you can get back to your regularly scheduled programming. But remember, I'll be fact checking you!
No comments:
Post a Comment