Fill me in, Linux fans. What is the Ubuntu project doing that has catapulted its popularity so far ahead of older Linux projects?

>>10
If ubuntu is sold by Canonical in stores (May happen eventually, I guess) this may change. They might acquire licenses for some things so they can distribute them without worrying.

Also, http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu is probably revelant to your interests. It's the ubuntu selfappreciation page.

>>6-10
By not distributing the mp3 codecs, the Ubuntu team is not liable for patent infringement.

the mp3 codec algorithms are patented. I don't understand how algorithms can be patented, but they are. You must be licenced to distribute software that uses the mp3 codecs in countries where this patent is legitimate. There is a (pretty hefty) fee to obtain a licence.

The Ubuntu team wants distribute their work to countries where these patents are legitimate however, they are probably not mp3 licence holders. If they do distribute the codec without a licence, the Ubuntu team will be liable for patent infringement by the patent holders. The patent holders can order that the ubuntu team stop distributing Ubuntu and no one will be allowed to distribute it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent
http://noepatents.eu.org/index.php/NO_Software_Patents

If you want to listen to music, rip your music to the OGG/Vorbis format. http://www.vorbis.com/ It is not covered by any patent and is technically superior to mp3.

>>11
Ubuntu can be sold by anyone. Ubuntu is free (as in speech) software and thus allows free redistribution. It doesn't matter if you charge money for it or if you wish to redistribute it at no cost.

>>12

>Ubuntu can be sold by anyone.

I know, what I was trying to say is that when Canonical starts making some money (Which they would really deserve IMO), then they might acquire licenses for things like mp3 and dvd de/encoders so they are able to redistribute them with packaged ubuntu versions. I think SuSE did that, IIRC they do have mp3 support per default.

>rip your music to the OGG/Vorbis

I can only recommend doing so to everyone, the quality you get from ogg is really nice for a lossy codec.

>>10
FYI: I just tried playing an mp3 with a freshly installed kubuntu system, it started amarok and a dialog popped up "Amarok currently can't play mp3's. Do you want to install mp3 support?" I clicked yes, it asked me for my password. One password and 30 seconds later, mp3 support works. It's becomming better and better,I guess. Every new version seems to be a vast improvement over the last.

>>12 So is AAC actually.

Between Vorbis and AAC, there's little between them. My only thought being that Ogg/Vorbis+Theora is more readily streamable (in my experience) than MPEG4/AAC+x264.

But as a codec, it's brillant. MP3 is really REALLY dated (circa 1991), and needs to be replaced.

Red Hat used to sell CD's back in the day and as far as I remember they managed to include mp3 codecs.

anyone else remember the time when gif algorithm was patented and the gimp couldn't create gifs?

>>16
Some linux apps (lol kolourpaint) still can't.

I'm not crying over the loss of GIF.

It's an old and outdated format anyways. PNG for the win. :-)

>>18
PNG is indeed superior, but right now there is no mainstream support for animated PNG or JPEG images available, and SOME BROWSERS ehem still can't do transparent PNG without some heavy workaround work, so gif still has it's uses.

Animated JPEG images? So, like, MPEG?

Anyway, I'd rather see SVG become widely supported before MNG. I think it has much more practical use.

> but right now there is no mainstream support for animated PNG or JPEG images available,

video >>> "animated images"

>>21
No browser I know of supports any video format nativeley, while pretty much all browsers support gif, and damn near no video format can do transparent backgrounds. So, to replace gif, browsers should start supporting MNG. MNG would be very nice because it has all the power of PNG, just animated, and animated images can actually be good things when used as content (E.g on wikipedia for explainig geometry) and not as decoration (Suddenly, animated gif's, THOUSANDS OF THEM!).

>animated images can actually be good things when used as content (E.g on wikipedia for explainig geometry)

Again, I think SVG would be better for that; being a vector graphics format lends itself well to charts and polygons.

>>23
Yeah, and SVG is, like, scalable, which automatically makes it a lot cooler than PNG. PNG can do nicer looking things easier, though (Think antialiased shaded rotating transparent product displays without annoying java applets). But you know, I'd be happy about proper support for ANY new stuff in IE (new stuff beeing stuff that is 'only' a year old or two). Be it CSS2, proper PNG support, or SVG, just ANYTHING.

Most other Browsers can already do this stuff or will be able to do it in the near future, but without IE supporting it (Having to install a plugin to view doesn't count, since most people probably won't), it's basically useless for serious web design.

>>15
not really. aac codecs are patented so they still suffer from mp3's problem. no one is allowed to redistribute software that uses aac codec software without a licence.

the ogg/vorbis codec is not patented and everyone is allowed to redistribute software that uses the codec. if you rip your music to ogg/vorbis format, all modern linux distributions will be able to play it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Licensing_and_Patents

Relevant: http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1772

So, gif is free now... But I kind of consider that a bad thing, since it will probably slow down the adaption of PNG even more. I WANT MY ALPHA CHANNEL, DAMMIT!

Im an windows user and sometimes a windows hater, but i never understood why to use Linux?

It doesn't run all apps, it has strange problems, no tech support etc. Could someone explain to me why is should concider Linux and switch from win to linx`?

Does it mean i have to change my comp setup, do i have to know some programming/script language?
Is it only for advanced computar nerds who know how to change stuff in deep root system files???

>>27
First, I wouldn't - EVER - recommend anyone who has no experience with OSes other than windows to just completeley switch to Linux.

That said, I pretty much only use Linux (Kubuntu, see, it even fits in with the topic). For me, it has several advantages:

• I have apps for everything I need (And probably for everything an average user needs), without having to search around a lot for apps - If I need something new, I just look in the package manager, which allows me to search, download and install stuff with about three clicks. And unlike most windows users, I get my stuff free and legally.
• My system doesn't crash. Well, it crashed one time. And that was because the harddrive failed. Also, apps don't really crash a lot, maybe one time a month.
• I am a geek, and as such, having a powerful console is great for me. You can do amazing things and be generally much more effective when you know what you are doing.
• I can be all elitist and feel superior and stuff.
• A downside: Yes, linux does not run windows apps, while there is an app called WINE which kind of simulates a windows environment and can get some apps to work, a lot of apps simply won't run. But most of the time, you will not even want to run windows apps anyways: For most things you'll need, there is a Linux app that will do the job as good as it's windows counterpart - or better (And by the way, a lot of those linux apps will not run on Windows, of course.).

It boils down to: Maybe linux is for you, maybe it isn't. Try a few live cd's (CD's from which you can boot a running Linux system which won't change anything on your PC) ot try installing a Linux distribution on a machine you have lying around (Or you could try installing linux on the same machine as windows, which isn't hard, but a tad more complex than the other stuff). Use it for a bit, and decide for yourself if you like it or not. Knowing a lot about computers still helps, but it is not as neccesary as it was even a year or two ago.

>>27
I use GNU/Linux (zomg!) because I care about free software. When we say free software, we don't mean "no cost software". We mean having the liberty to use the software, the liberty to study how the software works and improve it, the liberty to redistribute copies as well as the liberty to publish improvements made to the software. Software that doesn't allow ALL four of these freedoms are non-free software.

> why is should concider Linux and switch from win to linx

If your computer needs are minimal then GNU/Linux will provide all you want. If you are a "advanced computar nerds who know how to change stuff in deep root system files" then Linux will provide all you want. If you are a Windows power user then GNU/Linux will provide 70 percent of your needs. It will not support your investments in wmv, mp3, web games, DVD, mpeg4 based codecs, Windows based games, Photoshop, or any other closed proprietary file format or non-free software. If you want them to run, you're going to have to get it running yourself.

>>28
>>29

thanks! I will try it out and see if it's something for me :D

>>30

You can download one of the many LiveCDs for various Linux distributions to easily try out Linux and see if you hate it or not without having to change anything on your computer. This is convenient if you're curious but not sure you whether you want it or not.