Don't hit me, I'm Ubuntu!

This post is another of many that talk about Ubuntu. Maybe not
be the most indicated to speak but I can give my opinion. Officially
I entered the Linux world the same day that Ubuntu 8.04 came out, I know, to
Anyone I must seem like a very new user but for a long time
that I have been getting into the subject, and if I did not have Linux installed it was because
a problem with my monitor.

I was always interested in people's opinions, and the software
free generates lots of debates but one of the most relevant and
controversial is about a Debian-based distribution and what is
very young compared to the others: Ubuntu.

How did Ubuntu start?
An entrepreneur named Mark Shuttleworth, sold his company before the 'bubble.com' burst for a considerable sum of money which he then used to:
-Be a space tourist.
-Founded a new company that would develop a new operating system.
I finally found Canonical Ltd..
and started developing the operating system (at that time without
name) free, available to everyone, derived from Debian and all that stuff
who know it by heart.
Some time later the first version is released (already called Ubuntu 4.10)
with their service of 'take home the free CDs at no cost' and
it would be updated every 6 months with a new version.
Up to here everything normal, right? DO NOT! At that time Ubuntu was not very
known but over time it grew and began to have a great
community (largely made up of users new to the world
Linux).

Ubuntu starts to be frowned upon:
So Ubuntu brings new users to the Linux world, who start to
interact with more advanced users, advanced users become
feel superior and it bothers them that people who know 'so little' can
use Linux and achieve the same things as them. That's where the
'Debianitas' to speak ill of Ubuntu and its 'stupid' users.
There is also talk that Ubuntu is unstable compared to
Debian, why it wants to make things easier for its users
compromising the stability of the system.
Many complained about its 6 month update cycle, which was very often.
Others were annoyed that it includes proprietary packages.
They started saying that Ubuntu was overrated and that its large community was due only to the free CDs.
They complain that Ubuntu is developed by a private company.

It is impossible to leave everyone satisfied:
The only way for Linux to have more users was by migrating to
new users, after all there are more users does not bring any
disadvantage.
It will be less stable than Debian but it is the only way to make an operating system more up-to-date and user-friendly.
The 6 month cycle is perfect for those who are unhappy with irregular Debian updates.
The proprietary packages are not mandatory installation.

How do new users bother linuxers?
Many complain that Ubuntu brings users who want everything easy,
who confuse Ubuntu with Linux, who think they are using Debian,
that do not distinguish between private and free packages, that say things
nonsense, that put commands in terminal without knowing what they do, etc,
etc, etc.
They may be tiresome, but YOU choose to help them, listen to them, and respond to them.
If they think they know as much as you know how to install Ubuntu, who will
matter! Nobody has to prove anything. Does it bother you that they don't care
use proprietary packages? At least they don't use Windows or pirated software, right?
It cannot be claimed that every PC user is advanced. Always
some will know more and others less, and others still less than less.

The infinite cycle of the 'Dark Side of Ubuntu':
It seems that everyone is now afraid / hated / mistrusted
companies (thanks Microsoft!), then everyone comes out to talk
bad, for example, from Google and even from Canonical.
That's where the speculative comments begin like 'Canonical only
matter earning money, in the near future it is likely that you will no longer
let's import and start to be just like Microsoft ', comment totally
ridiculous because so far Mark's company has only registered
lost, and seek to be self-profitable, but that does not mean they want to
just make money. In addition, an operating system would be very hypocritical
proprietary Windows style with the name 'Ubuntu' and let's not even talk about
thousands (or at that time millions;)) of users would stop using it.
Having clarified the previous point, a Mandriva employee comes out giving a
personal opinion about Canonical and uses the data of the losses of
Ubuntu developer company to say they are competition
unfair and that there is something shady in the amount of expenses you have
canonical.
Then it is explained again that Mr. Shuttleworth is paying
expenses for now until Canonical becomes self-profitable. How?
Supporting large companies and offering some products
private with additional cost. That's when they jump up again to say
that Ubuntu will become a Windows and that it will sell more and more
proprietary software and will contribute less to free software, which only cares
money, etc. Then we remember the Canonical losses and jump
'other' to say that there is something strange in those expenses without profitability. That
not an infinite loop?

So is Ubuntu good or bad?
For now it makes things easier for many new users, helps (and
develops) many projects with his Launchpad, makes Linux grow on
users (and being more they take us more into account). Does anyone ever
Did you mention that Canonical sells various recycled items on their site?
I think it is good de facto. Canonical can't out of nowhere
become a 'Microsoft' because (almost) all its users
they would migrate to other distros like Fedora or Mandriva.

Conclusion:
Everyone is free to use the distro they want but it is not good to do
bad reputation to others for free. You can have your reasons not to use
Ubuntu and insurance are valid, but that does not mean that they are valid for everything
the world.