Mint vs Ubuntu - Why Mint?

[Pjotr]

Their revenue in 2013 was US$65.7 million. Everyone can look that up on Wikipedia. So they are indeed a fairly large company.
On top of that, Mark Shuttleworth's net worth is more than $500 million. That's also a "provable fact" everyone can look up.
From that information you can conclude that they could give back much more to Linux and Free Software than they are doing right now.

Nonsense. Check your facts about 2013:
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Bl ... -statement

Key quotes:
"All told, during the 2013 financial year, these revenue streams gave the Canonical Group a gross profit of of $60.6 million and a net loss of $21.3 million."

"Canonical would require in the neighborhood of $180 million in a single year to become profitable -- nearly three times its gross income for 2013."

"While Canonical's gross profits were up 11% from 2012's total of $54.5 million, in 2013, the total loss nearly doubled from 2013's $10.2 million. In fact, almost every figure for 2013 is worse than in 2012."

And if I focus on *desktop* Ubuntu, that's the biggest loss there is:
"in August 2013, Shuttleworth stated that Canonical could be profitable if it focused only on servers or cloud services."
In depth:
http://arstechnica.com/information-tech ... e-company/

I repeat: the Mint project leans heavily on desktop Ubuntu, which is a big loss for Canonical. Therefore it does *not* help, when people on the Mint forum are bashing desktop Ubuntu.

[Fragezeichen]

Yes, but that's because of aggressive expansion and heavy investments.
Amazon was also making losses in the last years because of expansion and investments, but you can't deny they are a big company with strong financial means.
Apart from that, Mark Shuttleworth still has a net worth of $500 million and a lot of that originates from Linux and Free Software. He could give something substantial back but he refuses to do so.

[Pjotr]

Yes, but that's because of aggressive expansion and heavy investments.
Amazon was also making losses in the last years because of expansion and investments, but you can't deny they are a big company with strong financial means.
Apart from that, Mark Shuttleworth still has a net worth of $500 million and a lot of that originates from using Linux and Free Software. He could give something substantial back but he refuses to do so.

Don't dodge the issue and admit your mistake.

Desktop Ubuntu is a big loss for Canonical. Stop badmouthing the main cornerstone of the Mint project and be thankful that desktop Ubuntu still exists at all.

[Fragezeichen]

In addition, the Canonical Group also has an interest-free loan of $105 million from its parent company, Futuristic Limited, a little known company which the report lists as ultimately controlled by Mark Shuttleworth.

Obviously, at least Canonical's parent company which also belongs to Mark Shuttleworth has got a lot of finanical means since they can simply hand out a interest-free $105 million loan.
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Bl ... -statement

[Pjotr]

In addition, the Canonical Group also has an interest-free loan of $105 million from its parent company, Futuristic Limited, a little known company which the report lists as ultimately controlled by Mark Shuttleworth.

Obviously, at least Canonical's parent company which also belongs to Mark Shuttleworth has got a lot of finanical means since they can simply hand out a interest-free $105 million loan.
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Bl ... -statement

Yes, so what?

The issue is: desktop Ubuntu is a big loss for Canonical. It's desktop Ubuntu that matters for the Mint project. Don't badmouth it.

[Moem]

The Canonical discussion is interesting and i'm certainly following it. But I don't have anything to contribute there, so I'll just answer the original question:

Why Mint? Well, I never tried any other Linux, so for me it was never a matter of Mint vs Ubuntu. I read some articles that said that Mint was probably the most comfortable distro for novice users right now. So I started looking into Mint as a way of getting away from the W10 upgrade that was starting to loom on the horizon and did not appeal to me.
And I liked what I saw. It was the first time that reading about a Linux distro gave me the feeling that this was something I could do. It felt like exciting new terrain, not scary; there might be some obstacles, but I clearly got the idea that there would be ways to overcome them.
That feeling remained as I downloaded and tried it out. Turns out I was not wrong. My Mint install now, less than two months later, does pretty much everything I could want it to do. The remaining obstacles are few and far between, and they're small.
So for me it was really simple: tried it, liked it, probably going to stick with it.

[Fragezeichen]

In addition, the Canonical Group also has an interest-free loan of $105 million from its parent company, Futuristic Limited, a little known company which the report lists as ultimately controlled by Mark Shuttleworth.

Obviously, at least Canonical's parent company which also belongs to Mark Shuttleworth has got a lot of finanical means since they can simply hand out a interest-free $105 million loan.
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Bl ... -statement

Yes, so what?

The issue is: desktop Ubuntu is a big loss for Canonical. It's desktop Ubuntu that matters for the Mint project. Don't badmouth it.

Probably the desktop version of Ubuntu is indeed generating loss for Canonical and its parent company. That doesn't change the fact that they make a lot of profit from Linux and Free Software elsewhere and give back way less than they could.
For that reason, because they are trying to make profits under the cloak of Free Software and because they on top of that are damaging the reputation of Linux by collecting the data of their users and including adware in their distribution, I personally dislike Canonical and Futuristic Ltd.
If you like Canonical, that's fine with me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think I will stop spamming this thread now. Sorry guys.

[mdiemer]

Still something of a noob here, but here's my experience: Ubuntu (13 something) was my first taste of Linux. I thought, "interesting, but I still like windows." Then Windows 8 came along, which made me check out mint (Mate 17). I made the mistake (for me) of trying to learn Linux by studying tutorials. so I put that away too. Then W10 came along. now I was really pissed at Microshaft, so once again I went scurrying back to Linux. This time I tried Zorin 9, and loved it. Still do. but then I wanted, as all Linuxers do eventually, to check out other distros. I reinstalled Ubuntu and upgraded it to 14.02. This time I was really impressed. Then I learned on the Zorin forum that Unity tracks you via Amazon. So I installed the Cinnamon DE. Wow. So I then installed Cinnamon mint. More wow. However, I experienced shut-downs. So I reinstalled Mate. but it didn't recognize my audio interface, even after upgrading it to 17.2. (I now suspect that a software update would probably take care of this). So I tried Xfce. Ah, just right. no shut-downs, and it recognizes my audio. So now I have that, along with Zorin and, Windows 7 on another drive. I recently have learned that the shut-downs were probably caused by my video driver. Pjotr helped me install the right one, and now I feel I could probably run any Mint, and perhaps most Linux distros, fine. but I'm going to stay with what I have for awhile. With Zorin and Mint on different drives, I have redundancy, in case one of the drives goes bad. As for Ubuntu vs Mint, definitely mint. Ubuntu, while pretty and powerful, just has too much of a Microshaft feel to me. As for Zorin, I have to say it's my favorite Linux. I can't figure out why it hasn't caught on more, except perhaps it hasn't been around as long. But it is fast and fluid. I will go back and forth, learning as I go about Linux in general. I will contribute to Mint, as I have done to Zorin, as I do believe in giving back, one of the themes of this thread.

[InkKnife]

I have my quibbles with Canonical and the way they do thing but I think the Canonical hate I see popping up once in awhile is unjustified. Canonical and Shutleworth have done more to advance Linux on the desktop than anyone else.
The Amazon search thing is a bad idea and I think it should be opt in but easy enough to turn off in preffs.
While Canonical is obligated to give back code they are under no obligation to let other distros take Ubuntu compiled binaries off their repo servers. Their obligation is just the source. If they wanted to they would be fully in their rights to shut Mint out of the Ubuntu repo.
The devs at Ubuntu do damned good work, there is a reason why so many distros are based on Ubuntu, it is a very good base. Mint users benefit greatly from the polish Ubuntu puts on things.
Lastly I want to say that there is nothing at all wrong with making money off free and open software. Redhat, IBM, Texas Instruments, Apple, and hundreds of others have been making money off FOSS for a long time. Last time I looked over 80% of the code contributed to the kernel was from for profit companies. Linux is a multi-billion dollar a year industry.

[Pjotr]

@InkKnife: well said, sir.

It would be a dark day for the Mint project indeed, when Canonical would stop making its desktop Ubuntu. Or when Canonical would confine Mint to just the source code.

It's bad enough that desktop Ubuntu generates heavy losses for Canonical; it sure doesn't help when people who benefit from the Mint project, are badmouthing desktop Ubuntu.

[MagicMint]

If Mint can do such a good job, that’s because Ubuntu, i.e. Canonical have done a damn good job before. If they can cope with such losses for eleven years now, it’s just because Mark Shuttleworth is still backing them. So for that alone, all Linux enthusiasts owe respect to him and his company.

For a certainty, the Internet has demonstrated it already, the only way to generate income from free content is advertising. And even Richard Stallman has clearly stated that there is no shame in making money with the help of free software (although he strongly disagrees with the way Ubuntu tried to do it by “spying” on the user).

Nevertheless, Canonical lets you the choice to disregard Ubuntu and use any of the derivatives instead. While this company is profit oriented like any normal business entity, Linux Mint is sustained by free donations without the need to generate revenue for its shareholders — it isn’t a business entity. These are just two different views on FOSS.

[MartyMint]

Nevertheless, Canonical lets you the choice to disregard Ubuntu and use any of the derivatives instead.

It wasn't always like that on the Ubuntu Forums. When Unity first came out, discussion of other DE's was quietly tamped down.
Anyone discussing other DE's was given the "forum shuffle" (having posts moved and buried in other obscure, not very visited sub-forums)...

[MagicMint]

@MartyMint: I was talking about derived distros, not about desktop environments. Unity ignited a lot of hatred inside the Ubuntu community itself, which certainly increased the popularity of the more conservative Mint DEs. But such business politics don’t serve Canonical either, so let be them what they are: just politics. @Pjotr was defending their (past) merits, which nobody can deny.

[frodopogo]

Those sound like good reasons to me.

I was aware of Ubuntu first, because a musician friend told me about it, and showed me Ubuntu on his computer.

And I thought to myself something to the effect that Ubuntu must certainly be making a splash and gaining some traction for a musician to know about it... I'll have to look into it.

BUT, when the Windows XP install starting having more problems than I could handle, and I did research.... the Ubuntu esthetic and the controls being at the top were deal killers.

Mint, being based on Ubuntu, seemed to have most of the pluses of Ubuntu, without the minuses. Controls were close enough to Windows locations that the learning curve was not steep at all.
AND the Mint esthetic appeals to me.... I naturally opt for grey and green, even on Windows computers. I find it's restful for my eyes.
To me, it makes sense to use and install the distro that is most pleasing to you with a minimum of tweaking.
Yes, you COULD customize Ubuntu to be like Mint, but that would be a lot more work.

Not too long ago, I tried Ubuntu MATE when it came out, and I found it quite useable, but a bit stodgy feeling. It's something I'd keep on another partition as backup in the unlikely event my Mint partition had problems, but it wouldn't be my "daily driver".

More recently, I heard about Cubuntu, an obscure French distro that features a Cinnamon desktop on top of standard Ubuntu.
I downloaded it. Actually, they SAY there is an English download, but that's not true.... you download the standard French version, install the extra language packs, and then change the language settings. I know some French, so it wasn't too intimidating.

So now I have Cubuntu all switched over to English, except for French internet radio stations on the menu bar. So it's now my backup installation. EXTREMELY pretty version of the Cinnamon desktop. And, it has a plus....you can log out, then log back in, and choose the Ubuntu MATE or the Ubunty Unity desktops. I had wanted to at least give Unity a TRY. (and my hunches were right, I didn't like it!)

Well, you might wonder, if I knew French, why didn't I just use the French version?

Somehow, when I use an OS, I'm using subconscious parts of my brain that are NOT well connected to the part that knows French. I can DO it, but it's MUCH slower, and doesn't make for a pleasant "user experience".

Anyway.... for a French user, Cubuntu would probably give Mint some stiff competition!

[Pjotr]

Well, you might wonder, if I knew French, why didn't I just use the French version?

Somehow, when I use an OS, I'm using subconscious parts of my brain that are NOT well connected to the part that knows French. I can DO it, but it's MUCH slower, and doesn't make for a pleasant "user experience".

Allez, à chacun son goût...

[ZakGordon]

I switched from Ubuntu to Mint a long time ago, because it seemed to me that Ubuntu was following the Microsoft way of doing things, related to makiing decisions about how the OS worked, and locking the user into their way, instead of letting the user decide how things worked.
To be fair, that may have been a decision based more on my inexperience than anything else.

This 100% imho. I used Ubuntu Feisty Fawn many moons ago, and as my first Linux it was a great 'new to linux' distro. It nearly made me shift from windows right then, but there were a couple of things that kept me as a mostly Windows user; in part i need Windows for very specific work related software (why i prefer dual boot builds of Linux/Window) and it did not support my monitor (a CRT type back then) so i was stuck with horrible refresh rates that would make your eyes ache after a few hours!

Still in the modern era the 'promise' of Ubuntu sort of dissapeared and as austin.texas mentioned above, their modus operandi seemed to change and that was not what i wanted to or would support. Sure i get that Mint is based on Ubuntu, and for that i am thankful, but i sure hope Mint never goes the same way. The same kind of thing is currently happening to Firefox sadly, which is why i use Palemoon (like Mint is based on Ubuntu but 'better', Palemoon is based on Firefox but 'better').