Caitlyn Martin is a troll!
There are a lot of writers who write about controversial topics not to add anything of value to the debate, but merely to stir up the flames. Today, that typically means attracting a lot of page views and lots of comments.
How Canonical Can Do Ubuntu Right: It Isn’t a Technical Problem by Caitlyn Martin is a perfect example.
We won’t focus on the fact that the sensationalist headline does not match what she says in the article, which is in fact mostly about technical problems she had with Ubuntu.
It’s the “trolling” sentences that are the signature of this type of article.
- “Other distributions which target the desktop and the wider consumer market do a much better job from a technical standpoint. They produce a better product.”
- “Even considering all of that I still feel that the downloaded Ubuntu offerings more often than not have been substandard when compared to other distributions.”
Which “other distributions”? How are they better?
Which “other distributions”? How is Ubuntu “substandard”?
And finally, after rambling about several unrelated topics, the conclusion: “At this point I recommend Mandriva 2010 for newcomers to Linux. No, it is not bug free. No distribution is. Mandriva’s developers are simply more responsive to bug reports and get issues fixed, usually in a timely manner. In addition, while Mandriva has had a few less than stellar releases they have, more often than not, done a pretty good job of getting things out that work. As always, your mileage may vary.”
My technical mind translates that to “Mandriva worked better for me than Ubuntu on the one box I tried it on.”
I’m not writing this to say that Ubuntu is awesome. I’ve had my share of problems with Ubuntu. I’m writing this to say that Caitlyn’s article is awful. She doesn’t say anything new and she makes vague complaints that only trick other people into trying to counter them. Well, I’m not feeding this troll.