Has Ubuntu Reached the End Of the Line?

By Keir Thomas, PC World |  Open Source, Linux, Ubuntu 7 comments

I admit it. I'm impressed. I might have written a wishy-washy review of the beta of Ubuntu 9.04, but now I've had a chance to play with the final release, I like what I'm seeing. I like it a lot. Well done, Ubuntu guys!

The changes are subtle but impressive. The dramatic improvement in boot speeds is a lot more useful than it might first sound. It's no longer a matter of suspending to disk at the end of the day for me and my computers. Now I just shutdown and reboot. Hibernating is too time-consuming nowadays!

There can be no doubt that the Ubuntu guys have finally caught up with Windows and Mac OS X (and, after all, this was the whole point back in the beginning).

Crossing the line

However, I'd argue that Ubuntu actually crossed the finish line this time last year, when 8.04 was released. Sure, there were a few bad decisions rolled out as part of that release, including a sound subsystem that was essentially unfinished. But what you got with 8.04 was a genuine swap-in replacement for Windows or Mac OS X. It really was Linux for the ordinary human. No hype. No bullhonkey.

The new Network Manager in 8.10 brought significant functionality for mobile workers, but it's getting harder and harder to list genuinely new features in each release. Subsequent releases have been mostly about polishing the diamond.

All of this leaves the Ubuntu guys with a very real problem: Where do they go next? What do you do once you've won the race?

It's an interesting question, and it's not hard for those of us who follow Linux to dream-up suggestions. Just take-up a few interesting technologies that are lying about on the open source workshop benches. The Ubuntu project is already sponsoring the porting of Google Chrome to Linux, but they could be the first distro to feature Google's speedy new browser. That would be a significant coup. How about if they made Gnome Do a large part of the project? And what's been holding them back from including gDesklets all this time?

I'm sure you can think of other suggestions.

Beware the Gnome

However, the biggest changes to Ubuntu in the mid-term are perhaps already being planned, and will come with Gnome 3.0, due sometime next year (current releases of Ubuntu are based around the 2.26 line). In many ways, the fate of Ubuntu and Gnome are implicitly linked, because Ubuntu is a flagship Gnome distribution.

The biggest change that will probably come with Gnome 3.0 is the abandoning of the traditional desktop system. Gone will be the Start-button-style arrangement that was borrowed from Windows 95 (or at least inspired by it). Instead, it's looking likely Gnome Shell will form the chief user-interface component. This is a kind of desktop-on-a-desktop system. It's a little hard to explain how it works and the best thing you can do is go and look at some screencasts of it in action. It's too early for it to be found in the Ubuntu repositories, but you can download the code and build it yourself. The devs have made it really easy to do so, especially if you're running a mainstream distro like Ubuntu. See the Building heading on the main project page.
In practical terms, Gnome Shell marks a significant departure from the way desktop Linux has operated up until now. But Gnome Shell also marks a departure in another significant way. To understand why we have to acknowledge an elephant in the room, which is this: open source tends to follow paths created by proprietary software.

Proprietary Paths

This is a controversial statement, I know, and there are several prominent examples in the open source world that contradict it. The Apache web server, for example, made the world wide web possible, and came about before any proprietary software company even had a clue what the Web was.

However, in other key ways, the maxim is hard to deny. The granddaddy of all open source projects, GNU, was initially a recreation of Unix. KDE was inspired partly by Windows 95. OpenOffice.org was inspired by Microsoft Office, and Evolution by Microsoft Outlook. Could we have had the Amarok or RhythmBox music players without iTunes coming first? This list goes on and on.

With Gnome 3.0, the open source desktop may well be stepping out on its own for the first time -- heading down a path it's beating itself, and not one created by proprietary software. And this is a major, major departure from how things have been done up to now, at least when it comes to the contemporary Linux desktop.

It's astonishingly risky. When it comes to user-interface design, many of us mistake ease-of-use for familiarity. But this only underlines how important familiarity is. And by experimenting with essentially radical new technologies, Gnome may be making it even harder for newcomers to switch to open source.

Everything that's been fought for, and won, on the open source desktop over the past few years, might be lost in a few strokes as people boot their new desktop Linux installations and utter that terrible word/phrase: "Whyditdodat?"

Scratching the Itch

There's another truism here too, and it applies to the whole concept of open source experimentation: open source developers have a habit of scratching their own itches, rather than those of their users. In other words open source tends to be very developer driven and developer focussed. By way of contrast, proprietary software is exclusively user-focussed. It has to be, or it simply couldn't exist. Nobody would buy a proprietary project if it didn't do what they want. Open source has no such hindrance.

What concerns me is that, in developing the open source desktop, developers might adopt certain ideas or ideological concepts to the detriment of end-users. All that matters to many open source developers is the sheer beauty of the idea. Everything else comes second.

None of this means that Gnome Shell (or any other innovative open source technology, on or off the desktop) will be poor quality, or outrageously useless. But I really hope they test technologies like Gnome Shell against members of the public, and maybe run a few usability labs. Developers need to remember that they are far from typical users. Above all, I hope the Gnome guys (and all open source developers) are brave enough to realize when an idea has to be abandoned, regardless of how intrinsically clever it is, or how much it deserves to succeed. (Again, please note that this isn't a veiled criticism of Gnome Shell, which I think looks great and is extremely promising.)

The Solution

As far as Ubuntu goes, however, I think I have a solution for the immediate problem of where to go next. In my opinion, the KDE4 project is maturing very nicely. The recent release of Kubuntu 9.04 shows off KDE 4.2 very well, and the 9.10 release in October will apparently feature the even better 4.3.

So why not move the main Ubuntu release to KDE4? Effectively, the Kubuntu project has been doing advanced research for such a move almost since the beginning of the entire Ubuntu project. They've developed the system software, for example, such as a GUI package manager.

KDE4 is extremely familiar for modern Windows users. In fact, I suspect that several people who have been using Vista might feel very at home with KDE4.

You may scoff at this suggestion, but do you know what? I've got a feeling it may become a reality in a year or two. Remember that you read it here first.

Keir Thomas is the award-winning author of several books on Ubuntu, including Ubuntu Pocket Guide and Reference.

7 comments

    Anonymous 2 years ago
    My answer to Keir Thomas' question: Has Ubuntu reached its last mile? What if we asked: Has Windows seen its last days? My answer: Far from it! Ubuntu, like Windows, will probably morph into a more-advanced version of itself, but it will still be good-ol' Ubuntu Linux! Just my 12 Euros of opinion....
    Anonymous 2 years ago
    Too bad that I missed this back in the late 1980's and early '90's...or even Linux, for that matter! All I can say is that I can't wait for it to show up on my computer! Beautiful, indeed!
    Anonymous 2 years ago
    The screenshots remind me of Desqview / DesqviewX.
    Anonymous 2 years ago
    Look up lazarus http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/...a delphi clone - works OK on U9.4 with gnome but the window style is slightly different from gnome
    Anonymous 2 years ago
    I think Linux needs a tool like Delphi which would boost the productivity of developers. There are tools for Linux but none are as polished as Delphi.I think Ubuntu group should also support Lazarus, an open source IDE like Delphi.Sandeep
    Anonymous 2 years ago in reply to Anonymous
    In fact, Lazarus is in the Ubuntu 9.04 package repository. You can install it using Synaptics package manager. :)
    Anonymous 2 years ago
    You do have a point, but apparently KDE4 is a very troubled project. There's a lot of bugs in KDE 4.2, and I hope they'll fix them. But what's more important is how KDE 4.2 differs from Vista. I've been an early adopter of Vista, and hence have used it for some years. When I tested KDE 4.2, I noticed that people truly familiar with Vista will have problems using KDE 4.2. There are some things that require knowledge of KDE4 concepts. For instance, the way the panels are configured is completely different from Windows: You can easily delete icons from panels, but you have to know that you can just as easily re-add them. The Start Menu like thing is also completely different from that of Vista, if you look closely at it. The same applies to GNOME: While it may appear that the concept has been borrowed from Windows 95, in fact GNOME is fundamentally different. Panels are all freely configurable, and what you see, is only the default setup provided by Ubuntu. The concepts in GNOME (and KDE) go back all the way to the earliest X window managers, like FVWM. XFCE for instance (another desktop manager for X) is based on CDE (without providing its drop-in actions, however), but can look like GNOME when configured such (as was done for Xubuntu).BTW, there are four major Ubuntu distros: Ubuntu (the one using GNOME), Kubuntu (the one using KDE), Xubuntu (the one using XFCE), and Edubuntu (a specialized version for educational purposes).I think that GNOME shell could be very useful. But unlike what you said, it's not something completely new, it's been borrowed from the recent versions of MacOS X and Windows Vista, as well as from existing X windowing technologies (X being the X Window System here; cf. www.x.org). The search bar thing (for programs) first appeared in Vista and was adopted into KDE 4 and GNOME Shell. The way applications can be dragged across workspaces existed since FVWM, when workspace switchers became commonplace. A workspace switcher lets you drag iconified applications across desktop workspaces. In current X window managers, there's also a pin button on the left side of every window title bar that lets you pin down windows on all workspaces. Then you switch workspaces and remove the pinning. So, the feature found in GNOME Shell is not surprising at all.When you talk about usability, you're talking about usability for the Windows user. But you forget that the traditional X window system has been used for decades already by millions of other people that are familiar with X window managers and expect a progression of these developments. GNOME Shell is a modern progression of already concepts already familiar to X users.Everytime Microsoft changes the user interface in dramatic ways (as from Windows 3.x to Windows 4 (NT4/95), or from XP to Vista, or from Vista to Windows 7), nobody complains about the amount of training involved for the users. So, I guess it's futile to advocate to the UNIX world to adhere to Windows concepts. Every new user interface requires learning, and Windows users already can familiarize themselves with GNOME or KDE with ease. But that's not because this has been intentional, but because the same concepts have been ubiquitous ever since Rand Xerox invented the GUI (which has been commercially adopted first by MacOS in 1983, and then by AmigaOS in 1984/85).Users unfamiliar with traditional X concepts will get used to them over time. The more you know about GNOME, for instance, the more you can take advantage of it. But even if you're unwilling to learn something new, you still know how to click icons and choose from menus.GNOME Shell is still under development, and so, what you see now will probably change. For instance, it's not a good idea to expect users to enter "gnome" into a search bar to find the GNOME menu applications. A simple button with the familiar GNOME menu icon that does the same thing will probably be sufficient to make the GNOME Shell accessible to users unfamiliar with it.

      Add a comment

      Post a comment using one of these accounts
      Or join now
      At least 6 characters

      Note: Comment will appear soon after you have activated your account.
      Obscene/spam comments will be removed and accounts suspended.
      The information you submit is subject to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

      ITworld LIVE

      Open SourceWhite Papers & Webcasts

      White Paper

      Consolidating SAP Applications to Linux on Power by IDC

      IDC studied a group of enterprises that had deployed SAP applications on IBM Power Systems servers running Linux server operating environments and had been working with those systems for several years. Learn about the results...

      White Paper

      An Interactive eGuide: Open Source

      By now, enterprises are well aware of the benefits of open-source software, which boasts a clean design, reliability, and maintainability, as well as support for standards and community values. But perhaps the biggest benefit is quality; since open-source software users have access to source code, bug fixes and enhancements come from multiple sources, often resulting in superior software.

      See more White Papers | Webcasts

      Ask a question

      Ask a Question