Ubuntu Hardy Heron Announced

Jono Bacon, Community Manager for Ubuntu, has announced development on the next version of the popular Linux distribution name "Hardy Heron". "Not only will the Ubuntu community continue to do what it does best, produce an easy-to-use, reliable, free software platform, but this release will proudly wear the badge of Long Term Support (LTS) and be supported with security updates for five years on the server and three years on the desktop. We look forward to releasing the Hardy Heron in April 2008."

Silly

[hhlost]

Apart from being silly, the code names add confusion to Ubuntu's already-confusing version numbering system.

I parsed it as "Hearty Heroin"...

[nweaver]

I always knew the FSF crowd were on some good drugs...

And hurts Ubuntu

[ACS Solver]

I've said it before and say it again... these silly names are hurting Ubuntu. When you need to convince a boss that installing Ubuntu on office computers is the way to go, you'd need a more professional sounding name. "Windows XP" or "BeOS 5" sounds fine. But "Ubuntu Hardy Heron" does not. Sure you can use the 7.10 number, but it seems that the Ubuntu community prefers not to use the numbers, and these silly names actually crop up within the OS more.

Stop with the names already!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hardy Heron"

This is one thing that drives me crazy about Ubuntu... these names are elitist and completely unintuitive. There is no obvious relationship between the version numbers and the names.

Somebody on the forums many mention a solution for "Feisty", but a new Ubuntu user may not understand that the solution will work on 7.0x, but WON'T WORK on Ubuntu 6.06. In order to know that "Feisty Fawn" is Ubuntu 7.0something, I have to know Ubuntu, dig around unmaintained Wikis, look it up on Wikipedia. I shouldn't need to waste this time-- I just need to get the damn thing working.

For example, do you see the phrase "Feisty Fawn" or "Gutsy whatever" listed anywhere on the top level support sites at ubuntu.com? No. Why not?

https://help.ubuntu.com/ [ubuntu.com]
http://www.ubuntu.com/ [ubuntu.com]

Somewhere, deep in the document ion you may find a map of Names-to-versions. But if you need a map just to achieve step one, your documentation has failed.

Re:Stop with the names already!

[Anonymous Coward]

And Windows XP is related to what exactly as a version name?

Re:Silly

[stefanlasiewski]

Because the usage is inconstant. One person may say "I'm using Feisty". Someone else may say, "I'm using 7.10". To the casual user, there is no obvious relationship or distinction between the two names.

And really, some people talk about 7.04 and 7.10 as if they are different major releases. But the numbering scheme suggests that 7.10 is only a minor release. And the two releases have different 'Code names', which makes it seem like there is a major difference between the two. That's confusing.

Re:Silly

[ianare]

The version numbers are actually quite logical - first number = year, second number = month. So 7.10 means october 2007, 8.04 means april 2008. It actually makes more sense than a lot of other software release numbers.
As far as the code names, well they are silly, but silly can be good. All too often we take ourselves a little too seriously. If you're pitching it to the boss (who is very much against silliness - the stupid bastard), then go by: Linux Operating System Long Term Support edition v 8.04 or something like that ...

Re:Silly

[wile_e_wonka]

I think the code names are intended to be pre-release--once released the code name is officially dropped for a version number (though the code name is unofficially retained by most users including myself). "Silly" or otherwise unusual code names are common in the technology world--My personal favorite is Apple's internal names for the Power Mac 7100 [wikipedia.org].

Ubuntu's version number system is very simple, straightforward, and understandable--it consists of two numbers taken from the date of the release it is applied to: [year].[month]. Very simple, huh?

In Ubuntu's case, it is wise for them to use a code name prior to release, given their version number system, because a any delays could render the version number less meaningful (the author notes that Ubuntu uses a predictable release pattern with new releases every 6 months, but I think the makers of Ubuntu are being cautious because everyone knows delays can occur).

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[nuzak]

I'm inclined to agree with the other respondent: the problem was not the name.

Why Ubuntu on the server anyway? For support? Vanilla debian would do just as well otherwise.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[popejeremy]

If a "professional" IT department is going to choose software based on who has the best name, they're already fucked.

Just use the adjective.

[SanityInAnarchy]

When I say we're installing "Ubuntu Feisty", sure, it sounds... different. But it doesn't actually sound stupid, like it would if I said "Feisty Fawn".

Same with Gusty. In fact, Hardy works even better.

I also tend to like names that don't actually offend programmers. Windows XP seems to me a deliberate attempt to steal the XP acronym -- and they have. XP used to stand for "Xtreme Programming", which is actually a very useful concept, and one which might have avoided some of the dumber problems Windows has had.

And they do this all the time. .NET, Word, Office, Internet Explorer, etc. They choose names that are so generic that you get most people confusing them with something else almost instantly. It's difficult to talk about a "Word processor", because most people hear that and think MS Word. It took Firefox long enough, and we still have to deal with people who think the Internet is Internet Explorer.

So now we have names like "Ubuntu" and "Hardy", and I think they work well -- they're distinctive, and they don't actually sound like anything else in the same field.

Re:I guess they were scared of copyright issues...

[ben0207]

Ignoble Iguana? Wouldn't that be SuSE?

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[kebes]

That's really too bad, because obviously important tech decisions should not be made based on the product name. If the product does the job, then that's what should matters. Besides, many software names sound goofy until you get used to them--I'm sure some people thought "Dreamweaver" was a rather ambiguous and strange-sounding name, but once it attains mindshare, the name gains the appropriate recognition. Same goes for "Powerpoint," "Photoshop," "Apache," and so on.

Besides, as others have pointed out, the discussion should not have gotten to "Feisty Fawn" in any case. That would be like discounting Windows Vista because "Longhorn" sounds silly. "Longhorn" was a pre-release code-name, with the final release called "Windows Vista." Similarly, "Feisty Fawn" is a pre-release code-name, with the final release called "Ubuntu 7.04."

I don't want to insult your coworkers, but as far as I'm concerned, allowing jokes about a product name to cloud one's technical judgment is not at all professional. And I really don't think the solution is to refrain from using pre-release code-names (which are helpful to the programmers)... because people making unprofessional judgments will just focus their baseless ridicule on something else (icons, artwork, color scheme, website, forums, personalities of people involved, etc.).

Re:Relevant news?

[ketilwaa]

Yeah, because Ubuntu (the number one Linux-distro [distrowatch.com]) is just like just another OSS project...

BTW: To all those people proposing new and funny names: The last word is supposed to be an animal, the first one being an adjective. I'm assuming you still find your alternatives hilarious, but trust the long time users on ubuntuforums.org: It gets really old, really fast.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

Short answer: I think the distro name has nothing to do with it.

The IT staff are more likely to want to keep you on MS Windows for other reasons than the particular name that the Ubuntu distribution uses.

        1) If they have an all-Windows deployment now, that means that they likely don't have
            the staff (or interest) in having to deal with multiple desktop OS's.
        2) HIPAA compliance issues.
        3) Because they're control freaks (this isn't news -- what IT department doesn't have
            some of that?)
        4) Possible complications with IT infrastructure. [Is Ubuntu going to log into the
            Windows Domain Controller and run the login scripts and mount network drives? Etc.]
        5) Because you asked for it, and the default answer is "no" because the IT department
            is overloaded with work as it is (which is typical)

But rather than explain any of these things, it's a LOT easier for them to say "NO" and make fun of the Ubuntu distribution name. The added benefit is that you're left with the impression that that's the problem and are thus diverted away from actually asking more questions that are tough to answer.

Re:Silly

[thegnu]

It's the most logical versioning system I've ever seen, because you know how old the release is. And you can't get confused by anything, at all. Higher number? Newer OS. Lower number? Older OS. As a practice, try arranging the following versions in the right order:

6.06
5.11
7.04
8.04
7.10
20.01

I bet you can do it. Plus, tell me when they were released. Now rearrange the following and tell me what date they were released (month/year):

Windows Vista
Windows 3.11
Windows XP
Windows Millenium
Windows NT 4
DOS 6
Windows 2000
Windows 2000 SP1
Windows 2000 SP2
Windows 2000 SP3
Windows 2000 SP4
Windows XP SP2
Windows XP SP1
Windows NT 4 SP1, etc

As far as silly codenames go, someone might want to know how Feisty Fawn compares to Longhorn, or Dolly, or some crap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_codenames [wikipedia.org]

So people wouldn't build a business on Zamboni, would they? How about Fidalgo? Would you manage your mail with Touchdown? How about let your kids run Whistler? I mean, really. You should berate people for being morons if they can't read a code name without letting it alter their opinion of the viability of the product in their IT infrastructure.

If people don't like things made by people with a sense of humor, maybe they should get the fuck out the tubes and stop blocking my passage.

Re:ObMrGarrison

[Anonymous Coward]

Bleeding Beaver

I just don't trust anything that bleeds for 5 days and doesn't die.

Now where's that "-1 Misogynist Prick" mod option; that's right, this is Slashdot: it's "+1 Funny".

Why were you suggesting Feisty instead of the LTS?

[Chuck Chunder]

For that sort of installation it sounds like the LTS edition would be much more preferable. Ie it is supported for longer (much longer if you only need the server installation) and will have a one hop upgrade to the next LTS (rather than a two stop upgrade from Feisty).

If you aren't telling them you want to install "Ubuntu 6.06 Long Term Support" then frankly you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[popejeremy]

Likewise, if a company organizes itself to allow people with no expertize in IT to make critical IT decisions, they're setting themselves up to be fucked, hard.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[smellsofbikes]

>If a "professional" IT department is going to choose software based on who has the best name, they're already fucked.

People vote for the guy with more hair. Taller men are paid more. People vote against stem cell research funding if their voting place is in a church, and vote for school funding taxes if their polling place is in a school.

Here are precisely all of your options: expect other people to be 100% rational and spend your life disappointed, or realize that people are primarily emotional and consistently make choices based on motivations they themselves don't understand and work to capitalize on that.
In other words: study advertising and marketing. They're not about choosing software based on the best name. Go ask half a dozen kids "if you go into graphics advertising, which job do you think will pay more, one where you use a program called 'photoshop' or one where you use one called 'the gimp'" and you'll find out something about perception and how it affects behavior. If a person doesn't have good metrics, the person will use whatever metrics are at hand to make a judgment. It is not unreasonable to expect that even with good metrics, people will still tend to use prima facie evidence to make decisions.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[popejeremy]

OK. Good point. Now the question is: Why should the Ubuntu organization put any effort whatsoever into convincing irrational people to use their operating system? They're not selling anything. Advertising is for a company that wants to convince irrational people to buy their product so that they can make lots of money. Ubuntu doesn't want to make lots of money. Based on Ubuntu's actions, I'm guessing it's enough for them to make a great system and then let the people who are smart enough to appreciate it enjoy it.

Re:ObMrGarrison

[Anonymous Coward]

misogynist? he didn't say hated, just not trust, now where's that -1 Sensitive Shrew mod

Re:ObMrGarrison

[zurtle]

Grandparent deserves either:
-1 Whoosh
or
-1 Stupid

It was a citation goddammit.

Re:Just use the adjective.

[ACS Solver]

Generic names. Leads to me to another thought.

I'm not a native English speaker - it's my third language. I'm fluent, I read books and watch movies in English, and generally know the language well enough. I knew words like "fire", "fox", "access", "office", "word", "vista" or "binder" before encountering the applications named so. However, I only found out what "heron" means today, and what "eft" means back when that version was announced. I'll readily admit that animal names (plant names, too) are the weakest part of my vocabulary in all languages I speak, but I still think it's better to have names that consists of words familiar to most people. As far as I understand, lots of native speakers didn't know what an eft is either.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[popejeremy]

I would buy Cockblocker Deluxe, based on the name alone.

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[EvilRyry]

Few reasons I'm considering moving my business servers to Ubuntu...

-I've had much fewer bugs in Ubuntu server installs than with Debian Etch. Bugs seem to get patched faster as well.
-Software is more up to date
-3rd party Ubuntu debs are becoming increasingly popular

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:And hurts Ubuntu

[Braino420]

They're not selling anything.

Ubuntu doesn't want to make lots of money

This is the first I've heard of this, can you tell me how you came to these conclusions? I always thought they sold support and that Mark Shuttleworth is a venture capitalist. Looks like they're selling stuff and want to make money to me. Is it possible that maybe you were talking out of your ass? Oh, and this "Ubuntu organization" you're talking about is called Canonical (the ones that handle the money, you should look it up!).