You're viewing a single thread.
Ubuntu is just Debian with adware
Are the Ubuntu ads in the room with us right now? The only thing I remember is apt telling you about Ubuntu Pro. At that point Plasma is adware too for advertising their donation page.
remember when Canonical pushed Ads in Unity? That commentator remembers.
There was the Amazon thing in the launcher years ago
I remember that one. The applet that lead to amazon with their referral code. From what I heard from Alan Pope, it did bring in money, but even the manufacturers they worked with always blurred/removed it from their promotional materials. So it got removed for good.
Ah yes. Complaining about the minimal version of the distro not being minimal due to a 2.6mb package. Canonical is a true monster.
You gave a snarky response implying that there aren't ads on Ubuntu and they replied with confirmation from a developer that they'll be forcing ads on ubuntu.
Are you still arguing that canonical isn't serving ads on Ubuntu? Or are you just being an ass because you were proven wrong?
There are no ads on Ubuntu. The terminal reminding you that Pro exists is not an ad. Or do we consider Plasma as having ads now? I read that they will be asking their users to donate once a year.
Okay, let's compare KDE and Ubuntu, as I understand it.
From what you said, the terminal reminds you than a Pro version exist, and that you can buy it. => This is a ads, they try to sell their product to you.
More question for the Ubuntu parts:
- How often does this happen ? Just once a year ?
KDE send a notification once a year to say they need donation, help for translation, coding, writing documentation, and more. => This is not a ads, this is a message to get help and donations, and only once a year.
If you don't see the big difference between the two things, i don't know how to make it more clear with other words.
I don't use Ubuntu, and if some parts are wrong, I wait for corrections !
I guess you could also ask: "Does the pro-tier give one any options/additional functionality that the non-pro/non-donation tier doesn't?"
Obviously, if you have to pay for additional functionality (like settings/themes/updates) then it isn't a simple ask for donation. Though, I'd argue to ignore trivialities such as "thank you"-emails and possibly a small visual-only token on the program that you paid/donated, as those barely count as "functionality".
Asking for a donation =/= charging money for security updates
Saying "you can use Ubuntu pro" is not intrusive at all
yeah, messing with
aptjust to push a service really doesn't sit well. And they don't stop there, snaps are preferred over apt packages in Ubuntu Land.Snaps suck so much!
Do feel it is designed to scare normal users though.
Like how the GUI software updater now shows a list of security updates, and then “there are more security updates available with Ubuntu pro” in the list of updates…. the obvious implication is “you’re computer has other known vulnerabilities that can only be fixed if you pay up”.
Liiittlle bit ransomey and let be honest that’s by design.
Wouldn’t consider myself part of the anti canonical pitchfork crowd but that new behaviour did irk me somewhat.
If Microsoft did that people would be up in arms. Appreciate canonical provide Ubuntu is free but normal users wouldn’t get that nuance as they don’t think they pay for windows.
Last time I loaded up Ubuntu, considering it for a server, the moment I saw that, I deleted the VM and took it off my list permanently
I have no interest in that kind of manipulative BS
Yeah, I was not loving how hard they’re going for snaps, but the whole “Ubuntu Pro” bullshit scaremongering just 100% turned me off of the distro.
ubuntu pro is free to just use on one computer
No - and if they left it at that it would be great. I had to clean up 25 devices that had ububtu Lts, and that advantage had enabled the repos for thst shit, so apt wouldnt even do a dist-upgrade to prepare for do-release-upgrade.
Its not just the OS either, they are cancer to oss with their mixed «community» and enterprise stuff.
They only ever open source as little as they can.
Sell services, not code
I see you've got the spirit of this meme
In principle yes, as Ubuntu is derived from Debian Sid, but with modifications to make it stable. Thus, the sources they are built from are different and hence, not completely binary compatible, like e.g. *Ubuntu and Mint or Debian and LMDE are. The configuration settings different also here and there and thus, guides for Ubuntu are not 1:1 transferable to Debian and vice versa.