Hacker News Reader

Comment by gkya | Hacker News Reader

Ubuntu is nice as a (1) desktop, but I can't see it's benefits as a server operating system. It's harder to configure, and more opaque than the alternatives. The devs seem amateurish and the company is too much unfocused for its size. The system is not well integrated and surprising changes occur frequently. Documentation is scarse and fragmented. There are systems like BSDs and maybe some Gnu Linux distros where the behaviour of the system and that the devs are way more predictable and processes and practices transparent. Why use Ubuntu for server, for other than its popularity and tradition? Is there actually any pros to it that I don't know?

(1) Edit: Removed "disability" from here, autocorrect accident.

View on HN

You might want to expand your idea with some actual details since it's not clear what you mean by e.g. “harder to configure and more opaque” or even just which alternatives you mean.

In general, I've seen developer preference for two reasons:

1. Debian & Ubuntu both share a massive collection of packages which have frequently been packaged in a manner which is amenable for automated system configuration (compare e.g. the tendency to use a combination of debconf and the preference for `.d` layouts so you don't have to modify files which will be overwritten by updates).

2. Ubuntu adds the entire PPA ecosystem which supports the very common case where people want LTS + a small number of packages which are updated more frequently.

A large fraction of users seem to disagree! Ubuntu is the most popular server distro in the cloud, by far.

http://fossbytes.com/ubuntu-linux-is-the-most-popular-operat... https://duh6oa3w9hopv.cloudfront.net/uploads/pdfs/RightScale... etc.

The must be doing something right, but of course as quickly as they rose, they could loose the market equally quickly. I do see interesting directions, though: Ubuntu seems to be the default choice on OpenPOWER servers (at least for now) and it will likely be a strong contender; see e.g. https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/47791.wss

One group that has certainly contributed and needs to be given credit is Debian!

I believe that's because devs want to use what they use for their workstation (that is, what they know the best) on their servers. That's understandable, and most cloud services give you boxes that are already usable but because you don't have sth. like the FreeBSD handbook, and because the whole thing is not that thightly integrated, complex stuff requires hacks and dirty workarounds or at least a lot of experience. I have not done any system-admin work, but I can say this: in one week I've managed to make my FreeBSD system completely reproducible after using it for the first time. I haven't been able to do that with any Gnu/Linux, and I've used it for more than ten years till last february I guess.

I take your point about FreeBSD's benefits, but we need to be realistic.

People want working devices/peripherals (admittedly, I'm not very familiar with the state of the drivers on FreeBSD today, but I know it has been an issue) and many prefer to be productive too rather than hack away at their OS. These OSes have moved out of the garage and are running a large part of this damn Internet :)

FreeBSD is certainly perfect for some niche uses but, I believe, it isn't realistic for many if not most GNU/Linux server uses today.

And that's where I'd come back to your initial point on Ubuntu's lacking server benefits: you may not see them, but many do, and for better or worse they vote with their choice. Even if many don't like it, let's be honest, many do benefit from it indirectly.

Ubuntu has done a really great job of getting its distributions into as many hands as possible. Consider these stats:

- http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/debian - 5K questions

- http://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#traffic - 224K questions

I meant technical benefits over other distros and Unix-likes.

well, if you have snappy as a base, with secure features such as roll back on fail update (such as the kernel) will be there (not yet on LTS I think).

If you need maas, juju (whitch of course can run on others distro), a system with 5 years of security updates without extra fees,

You can get similar (and even more) features from openSUSE Leap.

I think the complete opposite. I don't like the desktop version so much but love the server. The support in the community is big (and bigger than most other distros) and I know Debian and know how to handle Ubuntu which has a more predictable support window time. Why should I use something else if I know my friend&enemy? Also I get a lot more software preconfigured for it, also ppa is a system not every other distro has.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com