I, for now, use PCLOS, but am a great admirer of Ubuntu and cannot just take it.
Here is an attempt to explain/reword the points in the above article.
- Technical Articles detail self explanatory or obvious things: Ubutnu is touted as the perfect desktop OS replacement for Windows. If it has to compete with Windows, Ubuntu has to provide equally easy ( or dumb, as you might say) documents. Lets check one of Microsoft document about setting up Windows Messenger. Here the document details the following topics
Windows Messenger system requirements Download Windows Messenger and set up a Passport Network account Before you start using Windows Messenger Windows Messenger setup Q&A For more informa
Now come on!! does a extremely simple task like setting a IM client requires such elaborate document, definitely not for me. However, M$ thinks otherwise. They are in this business since long, so if they believe that such docs are a must; Ubuntu better come up with similar docs for its users.
- Technical writers skip technically complex topics: Ubuntu believes that using "command line" is meant only for advanced users and considers it at par with installing server applications like DNS/web servers etc. Clearly the target audience is an average user who is not bothered about the inside technical details and just wants to get the work done. I think that an average users would be interested in setting up wireless network, but equally disinterested in knowing about details of TCP/IP.
- Book authors assume that more technically inclined users would use Slackware or Debian instead of Ubuntu. Ubuntu provides a well balanced desktop OS and advanced users too feel at home. A huge number of Linux programmers actually code on Ubuntu ( no data to support this, just from my knowledge from various mailing lists ). However, Ubuntu provides a system that just works so some Linux enthusiasts might not find it challenging enough. Those people might choose a Gentoo, a Arch or a Slackware. These are just a matter of personal preference as there are instances of people changing from Ubuntu to Gentoo as well as Gentoo to Ubuntu.
- Non-CLI means low IQ: This is rather serious one and I strongly beg to differ. Its just a matter of ease. If someone is more comfortable and productive using GUI tools, whats the harm in it? I was in the state, when I totally believed that CLI is cool and the only way for geeks. I was so sure of CLI, that I started using emacs instead of Xemacs and boasted of how faster I can work with few key strokes instead of using mouse. With time I realized that even in Xemacs I can use the same keystrokes and have an additional benefit of using the mouse if required. CLI vs GUI is just an ongoing debate with strong feelings from both sides. Its like KDE vs Gnome, not to forget that Linus Torvalds himself advocates KDE.
Flames, rants, disagreement.......... Bring it on.