[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ditto Aaron Toponce Ditto > > > > > Aaron Toponce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 08/13/2007 01:59 PM > Please respond to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To > alan c <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc > Ubuntu Marketing <[email protected]> > Subject > Re: [ubuntu-marketing] heads up - Why Is PCLinuxOS 2007 Better Than > Ubuntu? > > > > > > > Looking at his blog, these are the reasons that he lists: > > 1) First reason, PCLOS is based on KDE, while Ubuntu is based on GNOME. > And the hard truth is that KDE is definitely better than GNOME. > > I disagree. Gnome is better than KDE. So, because of my opinion, that > makes Ubuntu better than PCLinux2007. Oh, wait, I can easily > install/download KDE for Ubuntu. Hmm. Does that mean they are the same > now? > > 2) PCLOS has far more stability than Ubuntu. > > Again, I disagree. Every stable release of Ubuntu that I have ran on > production machines, workstations, and school labs, has had little if > any stability issues, whereas every RPM-based distro I have run, has had > very major stability issues, including distros from big companies like > RedHat, Novell and even Sun Microsystems. I guess .deb just "works for > me". > > 3) PCLOS comes pre-installed with most of commonly used multimedia > formats(except real player, quick time, and mpg), while Ubuntu doesn't. > > So, what does it come installed with, if it doesn't have Real Player, > QuickTime and MPEG? Oh, the Windows formats? They're the most widely > used? I must upgrade my system then, as I haven't had the need in > almost 3 years to view a Windows-based format. Besides, where is his > support to backup his claims? > > 4) Apparently, we missed that number. > > 5) PCLOS control center is a big and easy tool to configure system with > just few clicks, while there is not anything analogous in Ubuntu. > > You mean the gnome-control-center? So, you like it in one big fat GUI, > rather than in a menu? And this makes PCLinux2007 better than Ubuntu. > Well, I like it better in a menu, so that means that Ubuntu is better, > because that's how I like it (see point #1). > > 6) Some things which i personally experienced with my own system: > > Ubuntu correctly recognized *all* of my hardware, and properly got them > running, including wireless, going all the way back to Warty Warthog, > where *NO* other distro, including Debian itself, has. > > 7) What Surprises Me Really As if why Ubuntu hasn't been able to do same > things... > > I guess it's the number 1 distro in the world because it does everything > correctly. Why fix something if it isn't broken? > > I appreciate the review, but it's nothing more than very opinionated and > one-sided. It even comes across as 'fan-boyish'. He doesn't support > his claims he makes on his blog, he overgeneralizes and stereotypes, and > further, only mentions the things that he does with a Linux operating > system. While he may feel that he's being honest, I would question a > great deal of that post.
From a marketing viewpoint, facts are only used when convenient, which may not be often for some products. It is surprising what can be achieved with clever marketing, even with a poor product. Microsoft? The more that something is stated then the more it begins to become, then becomes, accepted as fact. It goes without saying that marketing budgets pay their way. Our whole (developed nations) economic culture and way of life seems embedded in marketing and its symptom, advertising. There is hardly a single fact to be seen! What I actually see is an erosion of the top place that ubuntu has in the distrowatch rankings. It is a number, and it is moving in the wrong direction. I also see some publicity, including hype, that encourages attention for and use of pclinuxos. When it goes up the rankings, there is a congratulations on the forum (when I looked at one time a while ago). The team is focussed on success, why not? One success would be 'Top of distrowatch'. For all I know every pclos user clicks on distrowatch twice each day! My agenda is to encourage success for ubuntu, not pclos. In addition to the continuing erosion of the ubuntu numbers on distrowatch, I have now seen a very rare event - a committed windows small trader *asking* me for pclinuxos, and not asking for ubuntu! Their message seems to be getting across. I do not like this situation, but this happened, and I think it is significant. There are some attractions to be had by using pclos that are not in ubuntu, and the reverse is also true. Some facilities could be changed in ubuntu (or kubuntu) of course. It is a marketing function to assess how product function affects sales and to inform designers, giving direction if appropriate. However I do *not* believe the technical differences are significant. As has been said, for example, kubuntu is also available and I know it can compete very well indeed. I use it almost exclusively. One explanation is that the PClinuxos message (whatever that is) is getting across and the ubuntu (Kubuntu?) message is not getting across so well, at least to a very visible population of clicking users. We are here to get -our- message accross. We have to judge our own actions, although distrowatch is giving me much cause for reflection. -- alan cocks Kubuntu user#10391 -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
