Ubuntu 10.10 Getting Multitouch ''Sequences''

Status
Not open for further replies.

zaixionito

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2010
66
0
18,630
0
So? If they can do it for hundreds of dollars less, it = more win for the consumers...

Also, with all the people working on it, it might be better...
 

mlopinto2k1

Distinguished
Apr 25, 2006
1,433
0
19,280
0
How about they come with optimized code that utilizes all the power of your CPU and Video Card? I love Ubuntu but the only thing that works "pretty damn good" is the low latency of Jack/Audio programs. Everything else "works" but is far from being as fast as Windows. This is not an opinion. I am a pretty detailed person and I have tested both to ends wit. I would rather deal with some of the drawbacks of Windows just to get full speed from my software.
 

mlopinto2k1

Distinguished
Apr 25, 2006
1,433
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]guzz46[/nom]Thats interesting, in my case i find it to be the opposite[/citation]I've heard that from others as well. Let me try and be more specific. Ubuntu's actual "OS" and backend runs extremely well. The operating system itself runs great. But, programs, other than the ones I mentioned.. do not. Not saying they couldn't! They could probably run way better. I just think more time needs to go into "software" development. I know it's hard work and I am not criticizing anyone. Just what I have experienced.
 

rjmehra

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2009
8
0
18,510
0
That's a great feature. Now if only they can make it install without black-screening, update without removing the menus, share folders without creating mounting conflicts, increase compatibility with basic web features... Ah I can dream.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I installed 10.04 on a old system that I wanted to setup in a spare bedroom for internet browsing. It works well enough, but I just cant see any advantage to it beyond it being free. I left it on there as I just dont care enough to go back and install XP on it.

The biggest issue I saw with Ubuntu is that the software installation is buggy and very limited. I used the software browser that came with it, found an app I wanted to try, then Id click install, it would appear to do it; but then for some of the apps it would say installed, but there was not any apparent way to open it, and I could not find it in the file system. The user experience was very dissatisfying for me when trying to add to the OS, the built in applications worked well enough though.

I also downloaded Chrome, ran it. Turned off the computer. Came back the next day, and Chrome was gone, but the installer was still there and acting like it was installed, there was just no way to open it. I guess it could have been done in a command line, but i dont know.

So I find it just stupid that they are adding multi touch when doing basic things like adding new programs can be a bitch. Can they not make it as easy as windows or mac, download a file, run the file, app is installed.

Its 2010, and if I have to go to a command line, then the OS is garbage.
 

guzz46

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2010
144
0
18,680
0
I've heard that from others as well. Let me try and be more specific. Ubuntu's actual "OS" and backend runs extremely well. The operating system itself runs great. But, programs, other than the ones I mentioned.. do not. Not saying they couldn't! They could probably run way better. I just think more time needs to go into "software" development. I know it's hard work and I am not criticizing anyone. Just what I have experienced.
I understand what you are saying, but i personally haven't experienced any slow programs apart from limewire because its java but thats slow to start in windows also, it could be because i use xubuntu rather than ubuntu and use preload to improve app start up.

Having said that though there is always room for improvement
 

irh_1974

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
300
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]firebee1991[/nom]What is it with Ubuntu and trying to rip off Apple lately? I can think of much better companies to rip off...[/citation]
Err, how exactly? You mean by being software?
[citation][nom]guzz46[/nom]I personally haven't experienced any slow programs apart from limewire[/citation]
Try utorrent instead
 
G

Guest

Guest
Lately, both the Ubuntu devs and the Kernel devs have really been batting 'em right out of the park, Maverick is probably going to be the best Linux distro yet, and the 2.6.35 and 2.6.36 kernel look to be 2 of the best kernels yet.

Linux has already taking over the server and the cellphone, next it will take over the desktop.
 

Duesouth

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2009
75
0
18,630
0
Ubuntu 10.10 is already release(in Beta or experimental format) but the stable current version is 10.04. this is old news. been using the experimental version since the release of 10.04 back in February 2010. Ubuntu release only or mostly stable version to everyone for free. and as for command line to install, that is the proper way to doing things. if you do not know Linux, then maybe you should get a book and read up on it. instead of being beep beep beep, instant microwave dinner. you want good food right? so you cook it properly. and not just microwave it. if you want instant fast, now, or I am going to die in 3 minutes, well you go with the easy way out, and not learn anything. presto. magic button and it is done. fast food. or instant food drive thru had mentally change the way people think, next please, next, next. no one has any patient now.
 

someguynamedmatt

Distinguished
Feb 7, 2010
1,551
0
20,160
165
I'm prepared to be downrated for saying this, but you get what you pay for. Ubuntu is free, and you get all the little hiccups and inconveniences ('installing' a program shouldn't require extensive research) that come with it. Apple OSX is... well... Apple OSX. I don't think I need to elaborate much more. Then there's Windows 7, which I have recently fallen in love with because of its ease of use and functionality. If I want to install a program, I double click on the setup.exe file and wait. "Life, Simpler."

Just my off-topic $0.02.
 

randomizer

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]stm1185[/nom]Its 2010, and if I have to go to a command line, then the OS is garbage.[/citation]
Why is it garbage if you need to do things in the fastest possible way vs the slowest possible way? I know my way around the Windows GUI fairly well so I don't have much need for the CLI (and on top of that the Windows CLI is garbage), but when I switch to any Linux distro I do things on the command line quite often. It's just so much faster than digging around through fancy menus.

That said, you should not need to use the command line for most basic tasks in Ubuntu. From the sound of it you've just run into one of Ubuntu's "features," ie. half-baked additions that don't work all the time. From the looks of it, this Multitouch thing will also be a half-baked idea. Rather than keeping it purely in the development branch until it's polished they will put something in 10.10 just because it sort-of-kinda works when the planets are aligned right. That's the Ubuntu way though. Add unpolished features, change the theme and create a ton of hype. Canonical have very good marketing considering their size, I'll give them that.
 

guzz46

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2010
144
0
18,680
0
I'm prepared to be downrated for saying this, but you get what you pay for. Ubuntu is free, and you get all the little hiccups and inconveniences ('installing' a program shouldn't require extensive research) that come with it. Apple OSX is... well... Apple OSX. I don't think I need to elaborate much more. Then there's Windows 7, which I have recently fallen in love with because of its ease of use and functionality. If I want to install a program, I double click on the setup.exe file and wait. "Life, Simpler."

Just my off-topic $0.02.
Thats all you have to do in ubuntu as well, open up synaptic package manager - search for the app then click install.

And every OS has hiccups and inconveniences including windows 7 despite it still costing $$$
 

guzz46

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2010
144
0
18,680
0
It $250 for windows 7 home premium upgrade where i'm from.

And i managed to get windows 7 ultimate for free but i still use xubuntu
 
@snoogins: $30 for Win7? Ah, right, an OEM Win7 Home Basic version, which:
- can't use 3D acceleration for the GUI
- can't connect to an enterprise network
- can't handle dual CPU socket machines (it can handle multicore, but SMP system owners: tough!)
- can't be moved to a different machine
- phones home every week or day
- can't update all installed software in one go, except if you get all your software from MS
- can't have more than one language installed.

So, yes, Win7 has its limitations. That's why I discarded it, because I would need Ultimate to do the above (and I do need the above) and it's a bit more than $30.

Ubuntu (or any Linux distro, as it stands) does it all out of the box:
- Compiz: 3D compositing
- multilingual: it's built-in (I need English and French, my wife needs Chinese and enjoys Italian)
- enterprise network connectivity: Samba+Evolution+NFS FTW
- standard number of CPU or CPU cores (it doesn't discriminate) supported out of the box: 32, kernel can handle up to 1024 (yes, it needs a recompile, but if you own such a system, then you probably can do that)
- license RECOMMENDS installing on several machines
- phones home only if you ask it to

Now, this improvement is for testing: Ubuntu 10.10 provides a framework that makes interpreting multitouch gestures easier - meaning that all programmers won't need to reinvent the wheel every time a new app is written. Moreover, if it's not used, then it doesn't hurt: apps will keep working as if it wasn't here.

About the speed issue: one of the most glaring problem is that Firefox took a hit with GCC 4.x (the C compiler used under GNU/Linux): a bad optimization makes Javascript execution twice as slow, and since EVERYTHING in Firefox is done through HTML+CSS+Javascript (GUI and pages), it slows it down to a crawl (try an official Mozilla build and compare with the built-in version in your distro).

About install issues: Linux is a secure system that doesn't allow apps to be installed globally by a user. So, when you install, say, Google Chrome as a user, it gets installed in your user's home directory. It may set up the environment variables so that it loads right after that, but if you don't make those changes permanent, the variables will be unset on next logout. Check your shortcuts and use absolute paths to launch your locally installed apps.

About install issues (2): the menus in GNOME (thus, Ubuntu) are generated dynamically every time an app is centrally installed; local apps can also notify the system if they have a launcher. However, sometimes the menu fails to refresh. Login off and then back on may fix that. Moreover, some Linux apps are purely command line driven, and will thus fail to appear in the menu! If you want to use mplayer, for example, it is a command-line media player: it won't appear on the menu, until you install a GUI for it (like gmplayer).

It is a good thing to read a package's description before you install it - at the very least, it'll tell you where the binary is, so you can try to run it through the terminal. This has the advantage of telling you WHY it fails to start if it, indeed, fails.
 

irh_1974

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
300
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]guzz46[/nom]I have transmission but can you use it to search for songs like you do in limewire?[/citation]
Err, no. Have you been living under a rock?
Try a torrent site, geez, do we have to teach you everything?
 

oddie

Distinguished
Aug 19, 2010
1
0
18,510
0
We all can throw molotovs both to Windows and Linux (Ubuntu), every OS has it's itches. For me WinXP is bleeding fast, Vista was a mistake, Win7 is nice, but it's practicaly unusable (Professional) on laptop with 1.8GHz CPU & 2GB RAM. It takes up to 10x more space on HDD than my Ubuntu Lucid ((sic!) ~15GB vs 1.5GB) boots slowly, runs slowly, can BSoD on my call (yes - I can do that) and I have to constantly watch out for viruses and malwares I get from practicaly everyone with Windows I go to with my pendrive. And they certain it's not from their systems as they obviously have their antiviruses intact.
Ubuntu on the other hand boots in less than 20secs, runs bleeding fast, has everything what I want and need both to entertainment, daily usage and work (graphic / webdesign). Sure it has some issues, but hey - every system has. The question is, will you pay for them and how much, and can you live with them. You choose what you like.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS