I guess it ultimately comes down to user's needs; if needs are minimal, such as typical web browsing and simple email, playing music and such, then Ubuntu and so many other distros, for that matter, could be a suitable alternative for Win 10. If needs are business-concentric where MS Office nd IE are required in a locked-down COE environment, or where non-Linux software is in demand, then it won't be a suitable alternative. I'm happily using an Ubuntu LTS alternative in Lite 2.0 on a dual-boot setup with Arch, the latter being my favorite of the two, so I guess this makes me an "Archie" ...LOL! BTW, just as a little tidbit, not meaning to instigate a verbal war, Canonical can and will collect personal data from those using their services and websites or downloading their products. They will disclose your personal data if required, mainly to comply with Law or to protect themselves. Their Privacy policy is actually very similar to that of Google's. A bit of searching reveals this.
'Searching in the dash When you enter a search term into the dash Ubuntu will search your Ubuntu computer and will record the search terms locally. Unless you have opted out (see the “Online Search” section below), we will also send your keystrokes as a search term to productsearch.ubuntu.com and selected third parties so that we may complement your search results with online search results from such third parties including: Facebook, Twitter, BBC and Amazon. Canonical and these selected third parties will collect your search terms and use them to provide you with search results while using Ubuntu. By searching in the dash you consent to: the collection and use of your search terms and IP address in this way; and the storage of your search terms and IP address by Canonical and such selected third parties (if applicable). Canonical will only use your search terms and IP address in accordance with this Privacy Policy. For information on how our selected third parties may use your information, please see their privacy policies. You may restrict your dash so that we don’t send searches to third parties and you don't receive online search results. To do this go to the Privacy panel and toggle the ‘Include online search results’ option to off. The Privacy panel can be found in your System Settings or via a dash search.' ~ op cit http://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy I still just don't see why people are so indignant about this.
Probably because it's just another privacy invasion that defaults to ON unless you opt out, which requires a bit of effort (I know, big deal right).. Windows 10 has taken this default ON privacy invasion and nonsense to such an extreme that 10 is now basically a 3 Ring Circus, and not an OS. But yeah, no big deal....
They weren't so upfront about it at first. I still recall being gob-smacked when I first saw Amazon results in Dash. Also, it's not just Dash. By default, there are also third-party results in Software Center. The default ought to be no third-party stuff. When you install Debian, for example, by default you don't participate in package popularity survey.
I just think that it all has to be seen in perspective. Some people are using Canonical and the 'Shopping Lens' to further odd tendentious views. Honestly, I'm scared to mention Ubuntu on this forum nowadays as it will automatically bring the trolls out.
You just have to ignore the trolls... I know that many people use Ubuntu without any qualms. I know I do..
It depends if you want something for nothing. Shuttleworth has been trying to develop Ubuntu and it has come at a cost. Honestly, it really isn't a big deal.
They need help. Shuttleworth made a decision, at the end of the day, I think he either had to try and fund further development or just stay as another distro going nowhere. There really is no such thing as a free lunch.
The effort is not the issue. The issue is that many users don't know their local searches are being collected. But at least they removed the feature on 16.04. Too bad many 12.04/14.04 users will never know about this. Exactly, Debian respects the user in this important regard. They too need to make money, but they have de DECENCY to ask first. Some people don't.
I think it all depends on how paranoid you are and the general state of your mental health. I've had too many paranoid discourses on Internet bulletin boards about CCTV cameras let alone data mining lol! I think the paranoia and FUD are essentially a postmodern phenomenon and appeals to a certain mindset. For them, I heartily recommend one of these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat Or maybe to live in a giant Faraday cage!
It could be, though my experience (although very limited) shows that most do care. Well, at least most "tech-savy" users (users that know how bad the Ubuntu case is), which comprises around 6 out of 10 friends I have. My point is "don't do things behind users' back", regardless if most will or will not care. Having and OPEN relationship with the users is, in my opinion, one of the most important aspects of Linux/Free Software.
Well, yes. My point is that the installer asks, and the default answer is "no". It doesn't just default to "yes", and leave you to figure out how to stop participating.
I've tried Ubuntu for months but as long as some software isn't available for Linux it can't be a replacement for Win 10.
Be careful there. it doesn't say "we don't send searches to Canonical", it says "we don't send searches to third parties."
@amarildojr I've just read this long thread and I was surprised with the violence of the reaction to your standings. Your knowledge of Linux is obviously above average which makes you an asset to these forums, stick around.
The reaction is not to standings, it is to unfounded claims. Without proof, security and privacy speculations are pointless. Mrk
That Ubuntu was going down that road was known (and commented on) before 12.10 was released. If I'm going to install an OS, I'd read up about it first to avoid being "gob-smacked" by something that's widely known. Shuttleworth's blog post is dated well before 12.10 was released: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 Then, of course, there's the matter of choice. If the defaults don't suit me or if I can't customize something to my needs, I can just try something else. I don't feel I have the right to tell someone what sort of distro they should make. For example, I prefer something more frugal and so I'm using the Openbox session of Lubuntu. A bit of what's going on in this thread maybe related to the tall poppy syndrome.
These are my sentiments also Mrk. Shuttleworth has explained Canonical's actions and policy decisions in regards to the Shopping Lens. The reaction to this by some people has bordered the pathological and has led to some bizarre campaign to attack Ubuntu with some sort of 'You are with us or against us' mentality. The proof of the pudding of this pathology is when anyone who tries to query any of the unfounded claims is instantly labelled as an 'Ubuntu Fanboy' ultimately reducing everything to the level of the school playground. People should have the right to discuss and mention Ubuntu without these consistent politically fundamentalist attacks. People who dislike Canonical have the right to not use it. They don't have the right to consistently spread fear, uncertainty and unfounded claims about it to satisfy, promote or further their own political agenda.
No it isn't. I suggest you actually read Shuttleworth on this. 'Why are you telling Amazon what I am searching for? We are not telling Amazon what you are searching for. Your anonymity is preserved because we handle the query on your behalf. Don’t trust us? Erm, we have root. You do trust us with your data already. You trust us not to screw up on your machine with every update. You trust Debian, and you trust a large swathe of the open source community. And most importantly, you trust us to address it when, being human, we err.' ~ op cit http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 I think the real point here is why the persistent need to spread or imply FUD?
